Rigid Pavement Design1

Design Procedure
• Assume various input parameters.

• Select a trial design thickness of pavement slab.
• Compute axle load repetitions for day-time & night-
time for different load intervals/categories during
design life.
• Compute the flexural edge stresses at slab bottom
due to single & tandem axle loads for the combined
effect of axle loads plus positive temperature
differential during day time.
• Evaluate cumulative fatigue damage (CFD) for
bottom-up fatigue cracking - Db.
Sanjay Garg, CE 1
Design Procedure
• Compute the flexural stresses at top surface of slab
at transverse edge due to single, tandem & tridem
axle loads for the combined effect of axle loads plus
negative temperature differential across concrete
slab during night time plus a fixed in-built
permanent curl equivalent to a negative
temperature differential of -5 0C.
• Evaluate cumulative fatigue damage (CFD) for top-
down fatigue cracking - DT.
• If Db + DT ≤ 1.0, then design is safe, otherwise

repeat the process.
Sanjay Garg, CE 2
Design Input Data
1 Shoulders - Tied concrete shoulders ? (yes/no) yes
2 Slab length, L in m 4.5
3 Slab width (or lane width), W in m 3.5
4 Transverse Joints have dowel bars? (yes/no) yes
5 CBR strength of embankment soil, (%) 5%
6 CBR strength of Subgrade layer, (%) 9.2%
7 Effective CBR of subgrade, MPa/m 8% 50.3
8 Thickness of Granular subbase (GSB), mm 150
9 Thickness of DLC base, mm 150
10 7 days compressive strength of DLC, Mpa 10
Separation (debonding) layer of polythene
11 yes
sheet is provided
Sanjay Garg, CE 3
Design Input Data
Concrete material details

12 28 days compressive strength, fck, Mpa 40
13 90 days compressive strength, fck, MPa 48
14 28 days flexural strength, fcr, MPa 4.5
15 90 days flexural strength, fcr, MPa 4.95
16 Modulus of elasticity for concrete, Ec , MPa 30,000
17 Unit weight of concrete, y , KN/m3 24
18 Poisson's ratio, μ 0.15
19 Coefficient of thermal expansion, α per / 0C 0.00001
Sanjay Garg, CE 4
Design Input Data
Traffic details
 Legal axle load limits in India –
10.2 (100) , 19.0 (186) & 24.0 tonnes (235 KN).
 Axle load survey – conducted for 48 hours.
 At least 10%, 15% & 20% of traffic should be
weighted for traffic volume of 6000 CVD, 3000-6000
CVD and < 3000 CVD, respectively.
 A axle is considered as a single axle, if the spacing of
consecutive axles (wheel base) > 2.40 m.
 Load intervals for Axle load group is taken
Single Axle Tandem Axle Tridem Axle
10 KN 20 KN 30 KN
 Only rear axles are considered in axle load spectra.
 A tyre pressure of 0.80 Mpa is taken.
Sanjay Garg, CE 5
Design Input Data
Traffic details contd...
20 Design Period (years) 30
Total Two-way Commercial Traffic (CVPD) in the
21 6000
year of completion of construction
22 Av. Annual rate of growth of commercial traffic 0.075
23 Average No of axles per commercial vehicle, A 2.35
24 Proportion of traffic in predominant direction , B 0.50
Design traffic factor (0.25 for 2-lane 2-way.
25 0.125
For multilane highways the value is 0.25 X B), C
Traffic factor for Bottom-up cracking (BUC)
26 0.200
analysis (for six-hour period during day), D
Traffic factor for top-down cracking analysis (for
27 0.300
six-hour period during night), E
Sanjay Garg, CE 6
Design Input Data
Traffic details contd...

Proportion of vehicles with spacing between
28 front and the first rear axle less than the 0.550
spacing of transverse joints, F
29 Proportion of Front single (steering) Axles, K1 0.45
30 Proportion of Rear single Axles, K2 0.15

31 Proportion of tandem Axles, K3 0.25
Proportion of Tridem Axles, K4 = (1-K1-K2-
32 0.15
K3)
Sanjay Garg, CE 7
Design Input Data
33 tyre pressure, q in Mpa 0.80
34 Modulus of elasticity for steel, Es in Mpa 2000000

Load Transfer efficiency factor for TDC
35 analysis, 0.66 for doweled joint and 0.66
0.90 for undoweled joint
36 c/c distance between two tyres, S in cm 31.00
Max. day time temperature differential
37 between top and bottom of concrete slab 16.8
(for BUC analysis), Δt
Max. Night time temperature differential
13.4 =
38 between top and bottom of concrete slab
16.8/2+5
(for TOC analysis), Δt
Sanjay Garg, CE 8
Axle Load Spectrum Data
Rear Single Axle Rear Tandem Axle Rear Tridem Axle
Mid-Point Mid-Point Mid-Point
Load Load Load
of Load Freque of Load Freque of Load Freque
Group Group Group
Group ncy (%) Group ncy (%) Group ncy (%)
(kN) (kN) (kN)
(kN) (kN) (kN)
185-195 190 18.15 380 - 400 390 14.5 530-560 545 5.23
175-185 180 17.43 360 - 380 370 10.5 500-530 515 4.85
165-175 170 18.27 340 - 360 350 3.63 470-500 485 3.44
155-165 160 12.98 320 - 340 330 2.5 440-470 455 7.12
145-155 150 2.98 300 - 320 310 2.69 410-440 425 10.11
135-145 140 1.62 280 - 300 290 1.26 380-410 395 12.01
125-135 130 2.62 260 - 280 270 3.9 350-380 365 15.57
115-125 120 2.65 240 - 260 250 5.19 320-350 335 13.28
105-115 110 2.65 220 - 240 230 6.3 290-320 305 4.55
95-105 100 3.25 200 - 220 210 6.4 260-290 275 3.16
85-95 90 3.25 180 - 200 190 8.9 230-260 245 3.1
< 85 80 14.15 < 180 170 34.23 < 230 215 17.58
100 100 100
Sanjay Garg, CE 9
Design Traffic computation
• Design traffic in design lane, A = 6000*0.5 = 3000
• Cumulative nos. of Commercial vehicles during design

period (two-way), T1
= 11,32,22,346
• Cumulative nos. of Axles during design period, T2 =

113222346*2.35 = 26,60,72,513.
• Design traffic after adjusting for lateral placement of

axles, T3 = T2 * 0.25 = 6,65,18,128.
Sanjay Garg, CE 10
• Design axle repetitions for Bottom-up cracking (BUC)

analysis (for six-hour period during day), T4 =
T3*0.20 = 66518128*.2 = 13303625.
• Design axle repetitions for TDC analysis (for 6-hour

night time traffic), T5 = T3*0.30 *0.55 = 10975791.
Sanjay Garg, CE 11
Design Axle Load Repetitions for Fatigue Analysis

For Bottom-up Cracking Analysis
Front single (steering) Axles = T4 * K1 59,86,632
Rear single Axles = T4 * K2 19,95,544
Tandem Axles = T4 * K3 33,25,906
Tridem Axles = T4 * K4 19,95,544
For Top-Down Cracking Analysis
Front single (steering) Axles = T5 * K1 49,38,971
Rear single Axles = T5 * K2 16,46,324
Tandem Axles = T5 * K3 27,43,873
Tridem Axles = T5 * K4 16,46,324
Sanjay Garg, CE 12
Design computations
Shoulders - Tied concrete shoulders ? (yes/no) yes
Transverse Joints have dowel bars? (yes/no) yes
Effective modulus of composite foundation, k, MPa/m 285
90 days flexural strength of concrete, fcr, MPa 4.95
Modulus of elasticity for concrete, Ec , MPa 30000
Unit weight of concrete, y , KN/m3 24
Poisson's ratio, μ 0.15
Coefficient of thermal expansion, α per / 0C 0.00001
Max. day time temperature differential between top and
16.8
bottom of concrete slab (for BUC analysis), Δt
Max. Night time temperature differential between top and
13.4
bottom of concrete slab (for TOC analysis), Δt
Load Transfer efficiency factor for TDC analysis, 0.66 for
0.66
doweled joint and 0.90 for undoweled joint
Trail slab thickness, h , (m) 0.28
Radius
Sanjay Garg, CE of relative stiffness, ℓ , (m) 0.6662
13
Bottom-up Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Day-time (6 hour) traffic and
Positive Temperature Differential
Rear Single Axles Rear Tandem Axles
Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue
Repetitio Stress Ratio Repetitio Damage Repetitio Stress Ratio Repetitio Damage
ns (ni) MPa (SR) ns (Ni) (ni/Ni) ns (ni) MPa (SR) ns (Ni) (ni/Ni)
362191 2.503 0.506 588331 0.616 482256 2.118 0.428 infinite 0.000
347823 2.422 0.489 1344185 0.259 349220 2.045 0.413 infinite 0.000
364586 2.341 0.473 4072762 0.090 120730 1.972 0.398 infinite 0.000
2207976
259022 2.260 0.457 0.012 83148 1.899 0.384 infinite 0.000
7
59467 2.179 0.440 infinite 0.000 89467 1.826 0.369 infinite 0.000
1995544 Damage from Single Axles = 0.976 Damage from Tandem Axles = 0.000
Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage due to
0.976 + 0.000 = 0.976
single and tandem axle loads =
Sanjay Garg, CE DESIGN IS SAFE 14
Top-Down Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Night-time (6 hour) traffic and Negative
Temperature Differential
Rear Tandem Axles Rear Tridem Axles
Rear Single Axles (Stess computed for 50% of axle (Stress computed for 33% of axle
load) load)
Expecte Allowabl Expecte
Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Flex Stress Fatigue Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue
d e d
Repetition Stress Ratio Repetition Damage Stress Ratio Damage Stress Ratio Repetition Damage
Repetiti Repetiti Repetiti
s (ni) MPa (SR) s (Ni) (ni/Ni) MPa (SR) (ni/Ni) MPa (SR) s (Ni) (ni/Ni)
ons (ni) ons (Ni) ons (ni)
126708
298808 2.399 0.485 1768731 0.169 397862 2.427 0.490 0.314 86103 2.353 0.475 3370878 0.026
5
256448
286954 2.344 0.473 3899961 0.074 288107 2.371 0.479 0.112 79847 2.297 0.464 9089367 0.009
7
630897
300783 2.288 0.462 11091781 0.027 99603 2.316 0.468 0.016 56634 2.242 0.453 38025932 0.001
8
219465
213693 2.233 0.451 52048021 0.004 68597 2.260 0.457 0.003 117218 2.186 0.442 infinite 0.000
23
49060 2.177 0.440 infinite 0.000 73810 2.205 0.445 infinite 0.000 166443 2.131 0.430 infinite 0.000
Damage from Single 274387 Damage from Tandem 164632 Damage from Tridem
1646324 0.274 0.445 0.036
Axles = 3 Axles = 4 Axles =
Total Top-Down Fatigue Damage due to single, tandem and
0.274 + 0.445 + 0.036 = 0.755
tredem axles =
Sanjay Garg, CE DESIGN IS SAFE 15
Analysis of Concrete Pavement as per IRC:58 - 2015
Shoulders :- Tied concrete shoulders ? (yes/no) yes
Transverse Joints have dowel bars? (yes/no) yes
Effective modulus of composite foundation, k, MPa/m = 285
90 days flexural strength of concrete, fcr, MPa = 4.95
Modulus of elasticity for concrete, Ec , MPa = 30000
Unit weight of concrete, y , KN/m3 = 24
Poisson's ratio, μ = 0.15
Coefficient of thermal expansion, α per / 0C = 0.00001
Max. day time temperature differential between top
= 16.8
and bottom of concrete slab (for BUC analysis), Δt
Max. Night time temperature differential between top
= 13.4
and bottom of concrete slab (for TOC analysis), Δt
Load Transfer efficiency factor for TDC analysis, 0.66
= 0.66
for doweled joint and 0.90 for undoweled joint
Trail slab thickness, h , (m) = 0.290
Radius of relative stiffness, ℓ , (m) = 0.6840
Sanjay Garg, CE 16
Expected Flex Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Allowable Fatigue
Stress Stress
Repetition Stress Repetition Damage Repetition Stress Repetition Damage
Ratio (SR) Ratio (SR)
s (ni) MPa s (Ni) (ni/Ni) s (ni) MPa s (Ni) (ni/Ni)
362191 2.399 0.485 1763475 0.205 482256 2.022 0.409 infinite 0.000
347823 2.324 0.470 5435730 0.064 349220 1.955 0.395 infinite 0.000
3069606
364586 2.249 0.454 0.012 120730 1.887 0.381 infinite 0.000
3
1995544 Single Axles damages = 0.281 Tandem Axles damages= 0.000
Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage = 0.281 + 0.000 = 0.281
Sanjay Garg, CE 17
Top-Down Cracking Fatigue Analysis for 6 hour Night Hours
Rear Tandem Axles Rear Tridem Axles
Rear Single Axles (Stess computed for 50% of (Stress computed for 33% of
axle load) axle load)
Expecte Allowabl Expecte Allowabl Expecte Allowabl Fatigue
Flex Stress Fatigue Flex Stress Fatigue Flex Stress
d e d e d e Damag
Stress Ratio Damage Stress Ratio Damage Stress Ratio
Repetiti Repetiti Repetiti Repetiti Repetiti Repetiti e
MPa (SR) (ni/Ni) MPa (SR) (ni/Ni) MPa (SR)
ons (ni) ons (Ni) ons (ni) ons (Ni) ons (ni) ons (Ni) (ni/Ni)
493771 324430 115303
298808 2.329 0.471 0.061 397862 2.355 0.476 0.123 86103 2.286 0.462 0.007
0 4 99
140781 799609 484651
286954 2.278 0.460 0.020 288107 2.304 0.465 0.036 79847 2.235 0.451 0.002
27 4 00
279141
300783 2.226 0.450 infinite 0.000 99603 2.252 0.455 0.004 56634 2.183 0.441 infinite 0.000
69
164632 Damage from Single 274387 Damage from 164632 Damage from
0.081 0.162 0.009
4 Axles = 3 Tandem Axles = 4 Tridem Axles =
Total Top-Down Fatigue Damage due to
Sanjay Garg, CE 0.081 + 0.162 + 0.009 = 0.252
18
single, tandem and tredem axles =
Analysis of Concrete Pavement as per IRC:58 - 2015
Shoulders :- Tied concrete shoulders ? (yes/no) No
Transverse Joints have dowel bars? (yes/no) No
Effective modulus of composite foundation, k, MPa/m = 285
90 days flexural strength of concrete, fcr, MPa = 4.95
Modulus of elasticity for concrete, Ec , MPa = 30000
Unit weight of concrete, y , KN/m3 = 24
Poisson's ratio, μ = 0.15
Coefficient of thermal expansion, α per / 0C = 0.00001
Max. day time temperature differential between top
= 16.8
and bottom of concrete slab (for BUC analysis), Δt
Max. Night time temperature differential between top
= 13.4
and bottom of concrete slab (for TOC analysis), Δt
Load Transfer efficiency factor for TDC analysis, 0.66
= 0.90
for doweled joint and 0.90 for undoweled joint
Trail slab thickness, h , (m) = 0.335
Radius of relative stiffness, ℓ , (m) = 0.76213
Sanjay Garg, CE 19
Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Allowable Fatigue
Stress
Repetitio Stress Ratio Repetition Damage Repetitio Stress Repetition Damage
Ratio (SR)
ns (ni) MPa (SR) s (Ni) (ni/Ni) ns (ni) MPa s (Ni) (ni/Ni)
362191 2.454 0.496 938445 0.386 482256 2.084 0.421 infinite 0.000
347823 2.370 0.479 2599353 0.134 349220 2.017 0.407 infinite 0.000
364586 2.286 0.462 11513704 0.032 120730 1.950 0.394 infinite 0.000
1995544 Single Axles damage= 0.551 Tandem Axles damage= 0.000
Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage due

0.551 + 0.000 = 0.551
to single
Sanjayand tandem
Garg, CE axle loads = 20
Top-Down Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Night-time (6 hour) traffic
Rear Single Axles Rear Tandem Axles Rear Tridem Axles
Expect Fatigu
Expecte Allowabl Expecte Allowabl Allowabl
Flex Stress Fatigue Flex Stress Fatigue ed Flex Stress e
d e d e e
Stress Ratio Damage Stress Ratio Damage Repetit Stress Ratio Damag
Repetiti Repetitio Repetiti Repetitio Repetitio
MPa (SR) (ni/Ni) MPa (SR) (ni/Ni) ions MPa (SR) e
ons (ni) ns (Ni) ons (ni) ns (Ni) ns (Ni)
(ni) (ni/Ni)
307256 211409 642367
298808 2.359 0.477 0.097 397862 2.385 0.482 0.188 86103 2.315 0.468 0.013
6 7 7
761249 468687 209752
286954 2.306 0.466 0.038 288107 2.333 0.471 0.061 79847 2.262 0.457 0.004
0 9 25
268452 134578
300783 2.253 0.455 0.011 99603 2.280 0.461 0.007 56634 2.209 0.446 infinite 0.000
92 03
11721
213693 2.200 0.445 infinite 0.000 68597 2.227 0.450 infinite 0.000 2.156 0.436 infinite 0.000
8
16644
3
19772
3
25633
3
21863
2
28942
1.733 0.350 infinite 0.000
4
164632 Damage from Single 274387 Damage from Tandem 16463 Damage from
0.146 0.257 0.017
4 Axles = 3 Axles = 24 Tridem Axles =
Total Top-Down Fatigue Damage due to single, tandem 0.25 0.01 0.42
Sanjay Garg, CE 0.146 + + = 21
and tredem axles = 7 7 0

Rigid Pavement Design1

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

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

Rigid Pavement Design1

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Design Procedure

• Assume various input parameters.

• If Db + DT ≤ 1.0, then design is safe, otherwise

Concrete material details

13 90 days compressive strength, fck, MPa 48

14 28 days flexural strength, fcr, MPa 4.5

15 90 days flexural strength, fcr, MPa 4.95

16 Modulus of elasticity for concrete, Ec , MPa 30,000

17 Unit weight of concrete, y , KN/m3 24

18 Poisson's ratio, μ 0.15

19 Coefficient of thermal expansion, α per / 0C 0.00001

Traffic details contd...

29 Proportion of Front single (steering) Axles, K1 0.45

30 Proportion of Rear single Axles, K2 0.15

33 tyre pressure, q in Mpa 0.80

34 Modulus of elasticity for steel, Es in Mpa 2000000

• Design traffic in design lane, A = 6000*0.5 = 3000

• Cumulative nos. of Commercial vehicles during design

• Cumulative nos. of Axles during design period, T2 =

• Design traffic after adjusting for lateral placement of

• Design axle repetitions for Bottom-up cracking (BUC)

T3*0.20 = 66518128*.2 = 13303625.

• Design axle repetitions for TDC analysis (for 6-hour

Design Axle Load Repetitions for Fatigue Analysis

Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage = 0.281 + 0.000 = 0.281

1995544 Single Axles damage= 0.551 Tandem Axles damage= 0.000

Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage due

S-ar putea să vă placă și

T30.20 = 66518128.2 = 13303625.