UNDER THE GUIDENCE OF

Dr. P. NANJ UNDASWAMY

1
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS OF
FLEXIBLE AND RIGID PAVEMENT A CASE
STUDY
Presented by
Bharath Kumar. M
Hanumantha M
Mamatha S
Pooja S
Vijaya Kumar A C


Introduction
Objectives
RBI Grade 81
Laboratory studies
Pavement design
Life cycle cost analysis
Results and Discussion

2
Contents
3

Introduction

Project location
5
Objectives of the project
To identify the design requirements for
the proposed upgradation of project road.

To evaluate the effect of RBI grade 81
chemical on CBR property of subgrade
soil.

To develop electronic spread sheets for
designing flexible and rigid pavements for
high volume roads as per IRC guide lines
using Microsoft excel.
6

To design both flexible and rigid
pavement structure on treated and
untreated subgrade soil as per IRC
guidelines using the developed spread
sheet.


To perform the life cycle cost analysis
for economic evaluation of alternative
designs considered

Methodology

Collection of data with respect to present
and future traffic scenario on the project
road.

Collection of subgrade soil samples from
various locations and to evaluate the
basic properties needed for classification
on and design requirements.
Formulate the procedure for designing
flexible and rigid pavement as per the
present IRC guidelines and automate
the design process by implementing the
procedure in an electronic spread sheet
(Microsoft Excel).

Implement the process of life cycle cost
analysis in an electronic spread sheet for
choice of alternative pavement solutions
on the basis of economic consideration.


9
RBI Grade 81









10
Composition of RBI Grade 81
Contents Percentage
Ca 25-45
S 5-15
Si 5-20
K 0-5
Mg 0-10
Al 0-5
Fe 0-5
Zn 0-2
Cu 0-2
Mn 0-2
11

Laboratory Studies


Grain size distribution analysis as per IS 1498 :
1970

Atterberg

s limits as per IS 2720 (Part V ) 1985

Modified proctor compaction test as per IS 2720
(part Vlll)

California bearing test as per IS 2720 (Part XVl)


12
Tests conducted
Gradation results of untreated subgrade
soil
13
No. Chainage
Wet sieve analysis
%Gravel %Sand %Silt & clay
1 127-120 2 75.00 23.00
2 128-530 0.40 71.80 27.80
3 129-120 4.80 76.40 18.80
4 132-500 4.80 54.80 40.40
5 134-000 19 80.20 0.80
14
Atterbergs limits of untreated subgade soil
No Chainage LL(%) PL(%)
1 127-120 35.00 21.00
2 128-530 Non plastic soil Non plastic soil
3 129-120 27.50 19.00
4 132-500 33.00 18.00
5 134-000 46.50 23.00
Soil classification of untreated
subgrade soil
Chainage Type of soil
127-120
Clayey sand (SC)
128-120
Clayey sand (SC)
129-120
Clayey sand (SC)
132-500
Clayey sand (SC)
134-00
Well graded sand(SW)
16
Moisture density test results of untreated
subgrade soils
No. Chainage
Compaction Test
OMC (%) MDD (gm/cc)
1 127 - 120 12.50 2.085
2 128 - 530 08.30 2.265
3 128 - 120 09.33 2.060
4 132 - 500 11.30 2..230
5 134 - 000 10.50 2.240
17
CBR Test results of untreated subgrade
soils
No Chainage CBR(%)
1 127 - 120 4
2 128 - 530 14
3 128 - 120 13
4 132 - 500 7
5 134 - 000 5
CBR Test results of stabilized
subgrade soil using RBI grade 81
Chainage % of Stabilizer Curing period CBR (%)
127-120
4
3days
29
6 36
134-000
2
3days
20
4 28
DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT AS PER
IRC 37-2011(DRAFT CODE)
Flexible pavement design thickness of
untreated subgrade soil
CHAINAGE 127-120 128-530 129-120 132-500 134-00
CBR(%) 4 14 13 7 5
TOTAL
THICKNESS
770 590 590 645 720
WEARING
COURSE(mm)
50 50 50 50 50
BINDER
COURSE(mm)
140 90 90 115 120
GRANULAR
BASE(mm)
250 250 250 250 250
GRANULAR
SUBBASE(mm)
330 200 200 230 300
Flexible pavement design thickness of
treated subgrade soil
CHAINAGE 127-120 134-000
% of stabilizer 4 6 2 4
Effective CBR (%) 13 16 14 15
TOTAL
THICKNESS
590 590 590 590
WEARING
COURSE(mm)
50 50 50 50
BINDER
COURSE(mm)
90 90 90 90
GRANULAR
BASE(mm)
250 250 250 250
GRANULAR
SUBBASE(mm)
200 200 200 200
Design of Rigid pavement as per
IRC 58-2010
Rigid pavement design thickness for untreated
sub grade soil
Chainage CBR (%) K(Mpa) Thickness(m)
127-120 4 35 0.3
128-120 14 60 0.29
129-120 13 59 0.29
132-500 7 48 0.3
134-00 5 42 0.3
Chainage
% of
Stabilizers
CBR(%)
Effective
CBR
K(Mpa)
Thickness
(m)
127-120
4 29 15 61 0.28
6 36 16 63 0.28
134-00
2 20 14 60 0.28
4 28 17 63 0.28
Pavement design thickness for
treated subgrade soil
LCCA OF FLEXIBLE AND RIGID PAVEMENT
Rate adopted for LCCA
Pavement crust Rate /cu m (Rs)
BC 4762
DBM 4144
WMM 750
GSB1 720
Prime coat 16
Tack coat 10
PQC 3932
DLC 1563
RBI grade 81 30
Total life cycle Cost Estimate for
Rigid pavement
Life cycle cost cost (Lakhs)
Initial cost 11789750
Maintenance cost
Joint seal 682500
Concrete spalling 33600
Texturing 640000
Total 12505850
RESULTS

By addition RBI grade 81 to the untreated
subgrade soil at 2%, 4% & 6% increases the
CBR value by 300%, 600% & 800%
respectively.

In case of Flexible pavement due to increase in
the CBR value of subgrade soil the pavement
thickness decreases by 23% from 770mm to
590 mm.

In case of Rigid pavement due to increase in the
CBR value of subgrade soil the pavement
thickness decreases by 7% from 300mm to
280mm.
In LCCA the cost of Flexible pavement
is 46% more compare to rigid
pavement for untreated soil.

In LCCA the cost of rigid pavement
decreases 26% as compare to flexible
pavement for treated soil for treated
soil
CONCLUSSION

By using small dosage of RBI grade 81, there is
substantial increase in the CBR value of subgrades
soil and also there will be considerable amount of
reduction in pavement thickness, therefore usage
of chemical stabilizer, RBI 81 proves to be highly
cost effective.

For both the untreated and treated cases the total
life cycle cost of rigid pavement is less compared
to flexible pavement, so rigid pavement is more
economical.

Life cycle cost analysis is more scientific
approach for the economic evaluation of alternative
design solution and for choosing the best
alternative.

REFERENCES
IRC: 37-2011(draft), Indian road congress
methods of design for flexible pavement
Guidelines for the Design of flexible pavements.
IRC: 58 -2010, Indian road congress Guidelines
for the Design of Rigid pavements.
IS: 2720-Part5 (1980), Indian standard methods
of test for soils: Determination of Atterberg Limit,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
IS: 2720-Part4 (1980), Indian standard methods
of test for soils: Determination of Grain Size
Analysis, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
IS: 2720-Part16 (1980), Indian standard methods
of test for soils: Determination of CBR values for 4
days soaked soil, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.

IS: 1498(1970), Indian standard methods of test
for soils: Determination of Soil Classification,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
IS: 2720-Part8 (1970), Indian standard methods of
test for soils: Determination Dry density of Soil,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Kadiyali L.R, (2011), Highway Engineering, 8
th

Edition, Inc. New Yark.
Khanna S.K., C.E.G.Justo (1971), Highway
Engineering, 9
th
Edition, Nem Chand & Bros, Civil
Lines, Roorkee 247 667 India.
Khanna S.K., C.E.G.Justo (1971), Highway
material testing, 9
th
Edition, Nem Chand & Bros,
Civil Lines, Roorkee 247 667 India.
Steven M.Waalkes, Life Cycle Cost Analysis: A
Guide for Comparing Alternate Pavement designs,
American Concrete pavement Association, Illinois