Design Report

Assignment 1
Group 29
EGH472

An assignment submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the

subject EGH472 Advanced Highway and Pavement Engineering in the
Bachelor of Engineering Degree. School of Civil Engineering and Built
Environment, Queensland University of Technology, October 2018.

Group 29 Dated: October 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

Table of Contents

1 Introduction.............................................................................................................1
1.1 Location of Project..........................................................................................1
1.2 Scope of Work................................................................................................1
2 Design Traffic..........................................................................................................1
2.1 Predicted Annual Average Daily Traffic..........................................................1
3 Design Speed.........................................................................................................1
3.1 Limiting Curve Speed (LCS)...........................................................................1
3.1.1 R – 325.......................................................................................................1
3.1.2 R – 350.......................................................................................................2
3.1.3 R – 450.......................................................................................................2
4 Type Cross Section................................................................................................2
5 Sight Distance.........................................................................................................3
5.1 Stopping Sight Distance (SSD).......................................................................3
5.2 Horizontal Curve Perception Sight Distance...................................................3
6 Alignment Development and Coordination..............................................................3
6.1 Horizontal Alignment......................................................................................3
6.2 Vertical Alignment..........................................................................................4
6.3 Alignment Coordination..................................................................................4
7 Road Drainage........................................................................................................4
7.1 Table Drain.....................................................................................................4
7.1.1 Table Drain Assessment.............................................................................4
7.2 Bridge Replacement and Culvert Assessment...............................................5
7.2.1 Bridge Replacement...................................................................................5
7.2.2 Culvert Assessment....................................................................................5
8 Intersections........................................................................................................... 5
8.1 Sub Title (as required)....................................................................................5
9 Conclusions and Recommendations.......................................................................5
9.1 Sub Title (as required)....................................................................................5
10 References.........................................................................................................6
11 Appendices........................................................................................................7

Group 29 i October 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

1 Introduction
The purpose of this project is to upgrade Farmers Road which currently is undesirable
—narrow, has some unsealed sections, posted speed of 60 km/h and has 19m Semi
general access only—to a B-Double route. This project will only be assessing Section 2
of the Farmers road which has 2.7km span.

The design report will only assess the preliminary or feasibility design study of the
project in accordance to The Austroads Guide to Road Design (AGRD).

1.1 Location of Project

The project site will be situated on a road of a rural town that is utilized as an
alternative route for heavy commercial vehicles access to the town’s industrial area.
The project site is 2700 meters in length and located 4000 meters east of the
intersection with North Rural Rd.

1.2 Scope of Work

This report will determine whether the preliminary design complies with the guidelines
and disclose any inadequacy and improvements required for this project.

2 Design Traffic
It is required for the annual average daily traffic to have a linear growth rate of 2% with
B-Double considered as the design vehicle.

2.1 Predicted Annual Average Daily Traffic

The predicted AADT is 600 vehicle with 30% being commercial vehicles with a
predicted linear growth rate of 1.8 - 2.5%. Taking into account the design life of 30
years and an average predicted linear growth rate of 2%.

3 Design Speed
One of the element that need an upgrade is the posted speed. The current posted
speed is 60 km/h—which implies that the operation speed is 70 km/h. It needs to be
upgraded to posted speed of 80 km/h—the design speed of 90 km/h.

3.1 Limiting Curve Speed (LCS)

Section 2 of the road has 3 curves: the first curve with R – 325, the second and third
curve with R – 450 reverse curves. The limiting curve speed and the operating speed
calculation for both radius are determined and the following statements are made.
However, the minimum radius of first curve is 336m, hence it will need to be upgraded
to transitioned curve with R – 350. The calculation use superelevation of 3%.

3.1.1 R – 325
The calculated LCS for the car and truck are 94 km/h and 88 km/h respectively. Both
are higher than the current posted speed which is 60 km/h, and it could be increased
to 80 km/h. Nevertheless, R – 325 is below the minimum radius, so it should be
redesigned.

Authors Page 1 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

3.1.2 R – 350
The calculated LCS for the car and truck for this radius are 96 km/h and 90 km/h
respectively. Both are higher than the current posted speed and adequate to be
increased to 80 km/h.

3.1.3 R – 450
The calculated LCS for the car and truck for this radius is 102 km/h and 96 km/h
respectively. Both are higher than the current posted speed and adequate to be
increased to 80 km/h.

4 Type Cross Section

One of the requirement for the new road is to reach 30 years of design life. Therefore,
based on Table 4.1 from AGRD 3 section 4.1, a new road has to be build. The cross
section specifications are as follows:

Table 4.1. Cross Section Specification Table

Specification
Element Reference
Existing Proposed
2 x 3.5 m AGRD 3
Traffic lanes 2 x 2.8 m width (standard traffic Section 4.2.4/ S
lane width) 4.2.6/ T4.5
3%
AGRD 3
Crossfall 2 – 4% (bituminous sprayed
Section 4.2.2
seal)
2m AGRD 3
Crown line -
(standard rounding) Section 4.2.3
1.5m AGRD 3
Shoulders 1m
(min. for rural roads) Section 4.3.2
1m
AGRD 3
Verge - (standard
Section 4.4
application)
cut, fill and table Cut 3:1
drain are generally Fill 6:1 AGRD 3
Batters
3:1 but sometimes (desirable Section 4.5
2:1 maximum)
2m of flat bottom
drains
Depth 300mm AGRD 3
Table drains V-drains
below the sub-grade Section 4.6
surface
Side slope of 6:1
2m from the edge of
cutting (minimum
AGRD 3
Catch drains - possible
Section 4.6.2
undercutting of the
top of the batter)

The road cross section geometry will be presented in Appendix B: Road Cross Section.

Authors Page 2 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

5 Sight Distance
For the efficiency and safety of road user, sufficient sight distance must be provided to
enable drivers to perceive and react to any hazardous conditions. This chapter will be
made based on Section 5 at the AGRD 3.

5.1 Stopping Sight Distance (SSD)

Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) is checked at the critical location, which has the highest
value of uphill (+4.5%) and downhill (-6.8%) for both cars and trucks. Furthermore,
reaction time of 2s is selected considering the road conditions (rural area, few
intersection) based on AGRD 3 Table 5.2: Driver reaction times. To add, coefficient of
deceleration has been selected as 0.36 and 0.29 for cars and trucks respectively
considering SSD value for most urban and rural road types. The calculated SSD are as
follows:
Table 5.2. Stopping Sight Distance Value

Conditions SSD Cars (m) SSD Trucks (m)

Uphill (+4.5%) 159.21 157.94
Downhill (-6.8%) 128.74 119.66
Flat 138.58 131.33

5.2 Horizontal Curve Perception Sight Distance

Horizontal curve perception sight distance can be calculated by adding distance to
react, distance to decelerate and distance of arc. The following table shows the
calculated horizontal curve perception sight distance. More thorough calculation will be
presented in the Appendix.
Table 5.3. Horizontal Curve Perception Sight Distance

R – 350 R – 450
Horizontal curve
perception sight distance 122 122
cars (m)
Horizontal curve
perception sight distance 116.44 116.44
trucks (m)

There is no difference for both radius since the transitional lengths are the same.

6 Alignment Development and Coordination

6.1 Horizontal Alignment

The current curves are R – 325 and R – 450 both are assessed and the minimum
Horizontal Curve (HC) radii was found to be 336m. The HC radius was found using
desired posted speeds (90 km/h for cars and 80 km/h for trucks), superelevation and
maximum desirable f. Hence, the R – 325 was upgraded with transition into R – 350
with spiral to make it safer since smaller radius means more work by the driver which
can lead to higher probability of crash.

The new design’s spiral length (Lp) was found by calculating Super runoff length (Sro)
and Tangent runoff length (Tro), then comparing Sro with Minimum spiral length (Lsp)

Authors Page 3 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

based on the table 7.4 on AGRD 3. The maximum value then become the spiral length
(Lp), which are 60m for 90 km/h operational speed and 53.4 for 80 km/h operational
speed.

Based on the assessment of both curves for desired posted speed, the pavement need
to be widen 0.3m on each sides of the road of transitioned curves in order to maintain
lateral clearance between vehicles in the carriageways and to accommodate B-double
trucks. The painted centreline will then be offset from the control line in order to provide
equal lane widths. All the horizontal alignment evaluations are based on AGRD 3
Section 7.

6.2 Vertical Alignment

6.3 Alignment Coordination

7 Road Drainage
The design of road drainage is crucial to prevent catastrophic disaster. It should be
able to convey stormwater through the road reserve with minimum nuisance, limit
flooding of public and private property and many more, adequately. One of the
parameter when deciding the type of drainage is its hydraulic efficiency. For this
project, the existing drainage is V-drains and proposed to be upgraded into flat bottom
table drain.

7.1 Table Drain

The existing table drains show signs of scour which required to be mitigated. In order to
mitigate the erosion issue, the drains are upgraded into 2m wide-flat bottom table drain.
It would increase the area and capacity of drains which eventually reduce the flow
velocity to be lower than the erosive velocity. Moreover, it should has invert level 0.3m
below the sub-grade surface for effective drainage of the pavement. In case of scour,
there are some type of protection for the flat bottom table drain such as: loaming and
grassing and rock lining or concrete. Furthermore, the table drains should be sloped
with 6:1 ratio away from the carriageway to ensure any ponding to occur away from the
formation, since it could cause damage to the pavement.

7.1.1 Table Drain Assessment

Table 7.4. Table Drain Assessment

Channel Flow Channel Capacity

(m/s) (m3/s)
Chainage 100 – 425 2.02 1.7
Chainage 1850 – 2050 2.33 1.96
Chainage 1850 – 2050 (width 2.5m) 2.41 2.675

With the max. permissible velocity before scour is between 1.9 - 2.1 m/s, table drains in
chainage 1850 – 2050 will likely to scour. With the increase of the table drain’s width, it
would also increase the area and the perimeter, hence resulting an increase in the
hydraulic radius, since the hydraulic radius and flow velocity is linearly proportional, it
would also increase the flow velocity. Although the channel capacity is increased, the
table drains should be redesign to prevent scouring and damaging the road.

Authors Page 4 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

7.2 Bridge Replacement and Culvert Assessment

7.2.1 Bridge Replacement
The current bridge is made of timber which is found inadequate and need to be
replaced. Timber with direct contact with water is prone to deterioration and it also risky
to flood. The designer has proposed to replace the current bridge with a large box
culvert structure made out of concrete to improve flood immunity.

7.2.2 Culvert Assessment

The purpose of culverts are to convey stormwater from one side to the other side. The
existing culvert has been replaced with 5/2400x2400 Reinforced Concrete Box
Culverts. This culverts should be satisfy with 2% of Annual Exceedance Probability
(AEP) of flooding. One of the parameter to be consider is the outlet velocities. High
outlet velocity could cause bank erosion at the downstream of an outlet, where
adequate protection and dissipation measures is required. Subsequently, tailwater
(TW) is also an important aspect in culvert designs. TW is the normal water depth
within the channel for the design discharge, and a low TW can result in erosion of the
downstream channel. To add, submerged inlet (Headwater (HW) > 1.2 Height of Barell
(D)) is suggested to improve culvert performance.
The proposed culverts can accommodate road with widths up to 12m, which is the
same as the proposed carriageways width. The TW is also below the designed HW
with the difference of 0.96m. Although the culverts condition is free water surface (HW
< 1.2D), the new culverts and timber bridge will minimise the risk of flooding.

8 Intersections

8.1 Sub Title (as required)

9 Conclusions and Recommendations

9.1 Sub Title (as required)

Authors Page 5 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

10 References
(Cited entries only)

Authors Page 6 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

11 Appendices

Appendix … This is a table list of your appendices. Your actual appendices

follow this page.

Authors Page 7 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

Appendix A : Design Speed Calculation

3.1 Limiting Curve Speed (LCS) Calculation:
R – 325, super elevation (e) = 3%
1. Assume initial LCS from Table 3.4 in AGRD 3
Cars : 94 km/h
Trucks : 88 km/h
2. Find side friction factors from Table 7.5 in AGRD 3
(use interpolation)
100−94 0.16−x
Cars, fAbsmax : =
100−90 0.16−0.2
X = 0.184
Trucks, fAbsmax : 0.16
3. Calculate V
V = √ 127(R)(e +fabsmax )
Cars : V = √ 127(325)(0.03+0.184 ) = 94 km/h
Trucks : V = √ 127(325)(0.03+0.16) = 88.56 km/h
 88 km/h
Adopted LCS:
Cars : 94 km/h
Trucks : 88 km/h

R – 350, super elevation (e) = 3%

1. Assume initial LCS from Table 3.4 in AGRD 3
Cars : 96 km/h
Trucks : 90 km/h
2. Find side friction factors from Table 7.5 in AGRD 3
(use interpolation)
Cars, fAbsmax : 0.176
Trucks, fAbsmax : 0.15
3. Calculate V
V = √ 127(R)(e +fabsmax )
Cars : V = √ 127(350)(0.03+0.1 76) = 95.69 km/h
 96 km/h
Trucks : V = √ 127(3 50)(0.03+0.1 5) = 89.45 km/h
 90 km/h
Adopted LCS:
Cars : 94 km/h
Trucks : 88 km/h

R – 450, super elevation (e) = 3%

1. Assume initial LCS from Table 3.4 in AGRD 3
Cars : 102 km/h
Trucks : 96 km/h
2. Find side friction factors from Table 7.5 in AGRD 3
(use interpolation)
Cars, fAbsmax : 0.152
Trucks, fAbsmax : 0.132

Authors Page 8 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

3. Calculate V
V = √ 127(R)(e +fabsmax )
Cars : V = √ 127(445)( 0.03+0.152) = 101.41 km/h
 102
Trucks : V = √ 127(445)( 0.03+0.132) = 95.68 km/h
 96 km/h
Adopted LCS:
Cars : 102 km/h
Trucks : 96 km/h

Appendix B : Road Cross Section

Appendix C : Sight Distance Calculation

5.1 SSD Calculation:

The value of RT = 2s is based on Table 5.2 in AGRD 3 Section 5.2.2 and the value of d
= 0.36 for cars and 0.29 for trucks are based on Table 5.3 in AGRD 3 Section 5.2.3.
The calculations are tabulated at the table below:

CAR Rt (s) V (km/h) d a SSD

Downwar
d 2 90 0.36 -0.068 159.2115
Upward 2 90 0.36 0.045 128.7402
Flat 2 90 0.36 0 138.5827
TRUCK
Downwar
d 2 80 0.29 -0.068 157.9438
Upward 2 80 0.29 0.045 119.6589
Flat 2 80 0.29 0 131.3301

5.2 Horizontal curve perception sight distance calculation:

Horizontal curve perception sight distance is the submission of Distance to React,
Distance to Decelerate and Distance of Arc.

Distance to React formula:

Authors Page 9 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

Distance to Decelerate formula:

Distance of Arc formula:

80% of Le

Assuming that there is no deceleration when entering the curve and transitional length
(Le) of 90m. The results are tabulated as follows:

Horizontal Curve Perception Sight Distance Calculation

Cars (m) Trucks (m)
Distance to react 50 44.44
Distance to decelerate 0 0
Distance of arc 72 72
Total 122 116.44

Appendix D : Road Alignment

6.1 Horizontal Alignment:

Operating speed for cars: 90 km/h

Operating speed for trucks: 80 km/h
Maximum superelevation (e): -3% to 6%
The first curve: R – 325
The second & third curve: R – 450

Step 1

V2
Hc Radius=R=
127( e+ f )

The value of f are based Des. max on Table 7.5 AGRD 3 Section 7.6. For both cars
and trucks, at operating speed 90 km/h and 80/h respectively, the value of f = 0.13.

Cars calculation:
902
R 1= = 336 m
127(0.06+ 0.13)
For operating speed 90 km/h, based on Table 7.3 AGRD 3 Section 7.5.4, maximum
radius requiring spiral is 400m
Trucks calculation:
802
R 2= = 265 m
127(0.06+ 0.13)

Authors Page 10 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

For operating speed 80 km/h, based on Table 7.3 AGRD 3 Section 7.5.4, maximum
radius requiring spiral is 300m

Since the minimum curve radius is 336m, hence curve R – 325 need to be upgraded.
Our team decided to upgrade it into R – 350.
Step 2

Since the first curve’s radius is below 400m, it is necessary to provide spirals and
upgrade the reverse curves into transition curves.

Step 3
Minimum spiral length (Lsp) = 50m for operated speed 90 km/h and 45 for 80 km/h;
based on Table 7.4 AGRD 3 Section 7.5.4

Superelevation development length (Lrr):

e1 = -3%
e2 = 6%
r = 2.5% ; appropriate for operating speed  80 km/h based on AGRD 3 Section 7.7.7

Cars:
0.278 (−3−6 ) 90
Lrr=¿ ∨¿ = 90m
2.5
Trucks:
Lrr = 80m

Relative Grade (GR); for operating speeds  80 km/h based on AGRD 3 Section 7.7.8:

WR = 2.8m

Cars:
9 x 2.8
GR= = 0.28
90
Trucks:
GR = 0.315

Length of superelevation development (Lrg):

Cars:
2.8 x (−3−6 )
Lrg=¿ ∨¿ = 90m
0.28
Trucks:
Lrg = 80m

Authors Page 11 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

Hence, Lrr = Lrg = Le = 90m for cars—posted speed 90 km/h and 80m for trucks—
posted speed 80 km/h

Superelevation runoff (Sro):

Cars:
3
Sro=90−90 = 60m
3+ 6
Trucks:
Sro = 53.4m

Tangent runout (Tro):

Tro = Le - Sro
Cars:
Tro = 90 – 60 = 30m
Trucks:
Tro = 26.4m

For the spiral length (Lp), use higher value of Lsp or Sro. Hence, Lp is 60m for operation
speed 90km/h and 53.4m for 80km/h operation speed.

Appendix E : Drainage
7.1.1 Table drain assessment:

Table drain geometry @ Ch.100:

n is equal to 0.035 because table drains tend to be fairly clear after construction based
on Table 2.2 in AGRD 5B Section 2.3.3. Average grade of road over length of table
drain is 4%. The calculation for velocity of flow is:

A = 0.3 x 1.2 + 0.3 x 1.6 = 0.84 m2

P = (√ 0.32 +1.22 ¿ x 2+ 1.6 = 4.07 m
R = A/P = 0.84/4.07 = 0.21 m

Authors Page 12 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

R0.667 x S0.5 0.210.667 x 0.04 0.5

V= = =2.02 m/s
n 0.035

Since the max. permissible velocity before scour is between 1.9 - 2.1 m/s and the
channel flow is 2.02 m/s, table drain would not likely to scour.

Moreover, the capacity of the channel is:

Q = V x A = 2.02 x 0.84 = 1.7 m3/s

Table drain geometry @ Ch.1850:

n is equal to 0.035 because table drains tend to be fairly clear after construction.
Average grade of road over length of table drain is 5.35%.

A = 0.3 x 1.2 + 0.3 x 1.6 = 0.84 m2

P = (√ 0.32 +1.22 ¿ x 2+ 1.6 = 4.07 m
R = A/P = 0.84/4.07 = 0.21 m
R0.667 x S0.5 0.210.667 x 0.05350.5
V= = =2.33 m/s
n 0.035

The capacity of the channel is:

Q = V x A = 2.33 x 0.84 = 1.96 m3/s
The max. permissible velocity before scour is between 1.9 - 2.1 m/s and the channel
flow is 2.33 m/s, table drain would likely to scour.

One of the proposed solution is to increase the width to 2.5m. Check for velocity of
flow:

A = 0.3 x 1.2 + 0.3 x 2.5 = 1.11 m2

P = (√ 0.32 +1.22 ¿ x 2+ 2.5 = 4.97 m
R = A/P = 1.11/4.97 = 0.22 m
R0.667 x S0.5 0.220.667 x 0.05350.5
V= = =2.41 m/s
n 0.035

Authors Page 13 of XX Dated: Month 2018

 Farmers Road Project Design Report

The max. permissible velocity before scour is between 1.9 - 2.1 m/s and the channel
flow is 2.41 m/s, table drain would likely to scour.

Q = V x A = 2.41 x 1.11 = 2.675 m3/s

With the width of table drain increased, the velocity is also increased.

7.2.2 Culvert Design:

Authors Page 14 of XX Dated: Month 2018