8/8/2012

CENG 6302
PAVEMENT ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
CHAPTER 6 DESIGN FOR
REHABILITATION AND UPGRADING
Alemgena Alene, PhD, MSc. BSc.
Email: [email protected]

Department of Civil Engineering

Ethiopian Institute of Technology (EiT) – Mekelle
Mekelle University

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

CENG 6302 Pavement Analysis & Design

Course content
Chapter Title
Ch1 Introduction
Ch2 Pavement Performance and Early Design
Ch3 Stresses and Strains in Flexible Pavements
Ch4 Loads on Pavements (ESA)
Ch5 Principle of Probabilistic Design Approaches
Ch6 Design for Rehabilitation and Upgrading
Ch7 Overview of Rigid Pavement Design
Ch8 Overview of Small Element Pavement Design
Ch9 Drainage and Road Embankment Design
Overview

1
 8/8/2012

6.1. INTRODUCTION

ROAD MANAGEMENT
A Framework for Sustainable Road
Management

Key Statistics from Emerging Countries

• Transport sector is 5 to 10 per cent GDP
• Paved roads account for 12% of length and 90% non-urban
traffic
• Construction & Maintenance is 1 to 2% GDP
• In some countries, actual expenditure 25% of need
• Every $ not spent on maintenance increases transport costs
by 4$
• Surfacing lives vary from less than 5 to 20 years
• Road crashes account for between 1 - 3 % of GDP
• Transport fuels and machinery account for 40% of import bill
• Differences in transport tariffs of up to 4 to 5 times
• Rural transport services can vary by more than double

2
 8/8/2012

Mix deformation

Bus awaiting repair

3
 8/8/2012

Accessibility problem on a feeder road

Culvert design and maintenance problem

4
 8/8/2012

Weaknesses in Road Management

• Inadequate and unsecure funding
• Greater priority given to new roads
• Poorly motivated organisations
• Weak or non existent management systems
• Inappropriate treatments and lack of quality
control
• Poor regulations and/or enforcement
• Equipment failures and lack of spares

What SOLUTIONS can we suggest ?

• Establish a dedicated and secure Road Fund
• Prioritise on a rational and equitable basis
• Adopt affordable standards
• Address deep rooted institutional problems by…….
• Implement appropriate management and quality
systems
• Tackle accountability and transparency issues
• Address transport management, regulation and
enforcement issues
• Seek to improve road user behaviour and vehicle
standards

5
 8/8/2012

WHAT IS ROAD MANAGEMENT?

• Purpose: To optimise the overall performance
of the network over time
• Road management involves:
• Setting priorities
• Defining activities
• Planning
• Allocating resources
• Organising and motivating personnel
• Controlling work
• Monitoring and evaluating performance
• Feeding back results to seek improvements

ACTIVITIES ON THE ROAD NETWORK

• Routine works
• Cyclic and reactive works types
• Periodic works
• Preventive, resurfacing, overlay and reconstruction
works types
• Special works
• Emergency and winter maintenance works types
• Development works
• Widening, realignment and new construction works
types

6
 8/8/2012

THE IMPACTS OF ROAD MANAGEMENT

The effects of road management can be assessed in terms
of the various impacts:

• Level of service (road condition)

• Socio economic impacts
• Road user costs
• Accident levels and costs
• Environmental degradation
• Road administration costs

THE MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS

• Planning
• Setting standards and policies
• Long term estimates of expenditure
• Programming
• Medium term work programmes
• Preparation
• Detailed project design and work packaging
• Operations
• Implementation of works in field

7
 8/8/2012

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE

FUNCTIONS
Planning Operations

• Sections/network considerations
• Time horizon
• Staff involved
• Data details
• Computer processing
• Use of private sector

THE MANAGEMENT CYCLE

Aims

Audit Needs

DATA

Implem. Actions

Cost/Pr

8
 8/8/2012

IMPROVEMENTS NEED TO BE
SUSTAINABLE
 User attitudes  Staffing

 Cultural issues  Training

 Economics and  Data and

finance computers

Sustainability

IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES

Technical

Institutional

External

9
 8/8/2012

HOW DOES HDM-4 CONTRIBUTE?

• Highway Development Management (HDM-4) is a
decision support system, to assist in determining
impacts of potential road investments

Management Function HDM-4 Application

Planning Strategy Analysis

Programming Programme Analysis

Preparation Project Analysis

STRATEGY ANALYSIS - Effect of budget levels

Annual
7.0 Budget

50%
6.0
Roughness

80%
5.0

100%
4.0
Target

3.0
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

10
 8/8/2012

WHAT ARE THE NEEDS OF OUR COUNTRY?

• What do you believe are the weaknesses in road
management in the country?
• What are the priorities for improvements in road
management?
• How will you assess the range of possibilities?
• How do we identify the priorities?
• Are your data collection strategies sustainable
• HDM-4 is a technical improvement - how might its use
be sustained in the country?

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

6.2. Overview of pavement distress and

failure mechanism

11
 8/8/2012

Pavement Evaluation
Pavement evaluation processes allow for:

• Establish maintenance priorities. Condition data such as roughness,

distress, and deflection are used to establish the projects most in
need of maintenance and rehabilitation. Once identified, the projects
in the poorest condition (low rating) will be more closely evaluated to
determine repair strategies.
• Determine maintenance and rehabilitation strategies. Data from
visual distress surveys are used to develop an action plan on a year-
to-year basis; i.e., which strategy (patching, surface treatments,
overlays, recycling, etc.) is most appropriate for a given pavement
condition.
• Predict pavement performance. Data, such as ride, skid resistance,
distress, or a combined rating, are projected into the future to assist in
preparing long-range budgets or to estimate the condition of the
pavements in a network given a fixed budget.

Pavement Evaluation
Pavement performance is largely defined by
evaluation in the following categories:

• Roughness (or smoothness or pavement profile)

• Surface distress
• Friction or skid resistance
• Structural evaluation

12
 8/8/2012

ROAD ROUGHNESS

"the deviation of a surface from a true

planar surface with characteristic
dimensions that affect vehicle dynamics,
ride quality, dynamic loads and drainage"

ROAD ROUGHNESS

IS:
• AN IMPORTANT INDICATOR OF ROAD
CONDITION

• A MAJOR FACTOR IN DETERMINING

VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS

IS NOT:
• A GOOD INDICATOR OF THE CAUSE OF
ROAD DETERIORATION

13
 8/8/2012

MINIMISING TOTAL COSTS

Costs

Total

Optimum

Road User

Construction/
rehabilitation

Maintenance

Design
Standards

ROAD ROUGHNESS - CAUSES

Rutting

Patches

Aggregate size

Potholes

Corrugations

Poor construction
at culverts

Cracks

14
 8/8/2012

Partially
cracked Surface Cracked asphalt Good asphalt Surface dressing
asphalt dressing

ROAD ROUGHNESS PROFILE

ROUGHNESS MEASUREMENT
• PROFILOMETRIC SYSTEMS

MOVING DATUM

TRL High Speed Profilometer

TRUE PROFILE

Rod & Level

TRL Profile Beam

• RESPONSE TYPE SYSTEMS

Towed 5th Wheel Bump Integrator

Vehicle Mounted Integrator Unit

15
 8/8/2012

The towed fifth-wheel bump integrator

16
 8/8/2012

INTERNATIONAL ROAD ROUGHNESS EXPERIMENT

PROFILING DEVICES
TRL Profile Beam
Rod & Level
APL Profilometer
RESPONSE INSTRUMENTS
Towed 5th Wheel Bump Integrator
Integrator Unit
Mays Meter
NAASRA Meter

TYPES OF ROAD
Asphaltic Concrete
Surface Dressings
Gravel
Earth

17
 8/8/2012

STANDARD ROUGHNESS UNITS

The International Road Roughness Experiment was held in
Brazil in 1982 to decide on a world-wide roughness standard.
The most suitable statistic was the:

International Roughness Index (IRI), in m/km

eg 2.1 m/km IRI

The IRI scale best satisfied the criteria of being "time stable,
transportable and relevant, whilst being readily measurable
by all practitioners".

The IRI is a mathematical simulation of a quarter-car

(ie represents one wheel of a typical passenger car) travelling
at 80 km/h and is derived from the absolute road profile.

NORMAL
16 SPEED
EROSION GULLEYS AND
DEEP DEPRESSIONS
14 50 km/hr

12
FREQUENT SHALLOW DEPRESSIONS 60 km/hr
SOME DEEP
10 ROUGH
IRI UNPAVED
AREAS
(m/km)
8
FREQUENT 80 km/hr
MINOR DEPRESSIONS
DAMAGED
6 PAVEMENTS
100 km/hr
SURFACE
4 IMPERFECTIONS MAINTAINED
UNPAVED ROADS

OLDER PAVEMENTS
2
NEW PAVEMENTS
AIRPORT RUNWAYS
0

18
 8/8/2012

ROUGHNESS
INTERNATIONAL ROUGHNESS INDEX (IRI) AND 5TH
WHEEL BUMP INTEGRATOR ROUGHNESS (BI)

PAVEMENT SURFACE TYPE

PAVED UNPAVED

DESCRIPTION IRI m/km BI mm/km IRI m/km BI mm/km

GOOD 1.5-2.8 1000-2000 2.8-5.1 2000-4000

AVERAGE 2.8-5.1 2000-4000 5.1-7.4 4000-6000

POOR 5.1-6.3 4000-5000 7.4-11.6 6000-10000

VERY POOR >6.3 >5000 >11.6 >10000

WORLD BANK CATEGORIES OF

ROUGHNESS MEASURING DEVICES

• Class 1 : Precision Profiles.

eg : Rod and Level
TRL Profile Beam
ARRB Walking Profiler
Face Dipstick

• Class 2 : Other Profilometric Methods.

eg : TRL High Speed Road Monitor (HRM)
APL Profilometer

• Class 3 : Estimates from correlation

eqns (including RTRRMS)
eg : Towed 5th wheel Bump Integrator
TRL Vehicle mounted Integrator Unit
Mays Meter
NAASRA Meter
TRL MERLIN

• Class 4 : Subjective ratings and

uncalibrated measures.
eg : 0 - 5 Mean Panel Rating
NOTE : APL = Analyseur de Profil en Long, ARRB = Australian Road Research Bureau,
NAASRA = National Association of Australian State Road Authorities

19
 8/8/2012

Categories of Roughness Measuring Devices

(defined by Sayers et al, World Bank Technical Paper No.46, 1986)

1. Precision profiles 2. Other Profiles

True horizontal

250 mm max 500 mm max

3. Estimate from correlation 4. Subjective or uncalibrated

Feels like
RTRRMS a 5 to me!

ROUGHNESS MEASURING EQUIPMENT

High-speed Bump
TRL Profile
Road Monitor Integrator MERLIN
Beam
(HRM) (BI)

Suitable to Whole Whole Calibrated or Calibrated or

measure Network Network test sections test sections

Data collection 0.1 metre Continuous

0.1 metre
interval: (using lasers) response

Operating speed: up to 95 km/h 32 km/h Slow walking

Approx road km 3 x 0.5km sections 2 x 0.5km sections

400 km 150 km
tested per day: (ie 6wp* x 0.5km) (ie 4wp* x 0.5km)

£1,200 TRL built: £1,000

Cost: £400,000 + dedicated (inc shipping) £8,000
vehicle self-built: £150

Also records Medium cost, Low cost,

Advantages: macrotexture, can survey easy maintenance, Very accurate
rut depth, etc. whole network fairly accurate

*wp = wheelpaths

20
 8/8/2012

CALIBRATION

&

STANDARDISATION

of

ROUGHNESS MEASUREMENTS

RESPONSE TYPE SYSTEMS

VEHICLE DEPENDENT

SPEED DEPENDENT

TIME DEPENDENT

21
 8/8/2012

VEHICLE MOUNTED INTEGRATOR UNIT

CALIBRATION CURVE FOR ROUGHNESS TEST VEHICLE

Vehicle A
(June 1997)

IRI
(m/km)

Vehicle Roughness (mm/km)

(As measured by test vehicle)

22
 8/8/2012

Each vehicle requires a separate roughness

calibration curve that will change over time.

Vehicle 1 8
(June 1997)
IRI = -0.924+0.002VR-(1.252x10-7 )VR2
7
6
IRI 5
(m/km)
4
Vehicle 2 3
(June 1997)
IRI = -14.97+0.0061VR-(4.50x10-7)VR2 2
1
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Vehicle Roughness (mm/km)

TRL PROFILE BEAM

MICROPROCESSOR

ADJUSTABLE
LEG

CARRIAGE
LVDT
FOLLOWER WHEEL

3.6m

23
 8/8/2012

PROFILE BEAM
PROFILE INTERVAL 100mm
RTRRMS

VEHICLE
MOUNTED
BI
INTEGRATOR
IRI
UNIT

VR

IRI

VR

IRI = A+B(VR)+C(VR)2

MERLIN

• Machine (for)
• Evaluating
• Roughness (using)
• Low-cost
• INstrumentation

24
 8/8/2012

Pointer

Chart
Handles

Wheel with marker in Weight Pivot Rear foot

contact with the road
Moving arm
Probe

Operation of the MERLIN

MERLIN - TYPICAL COMPLETED CHART

X
XX
XX
XX XX
X XX
X XX
XX XX
X X X XX XX
D = 88 mm

XXXXX XX X X X X XX XX
X X X X X XX XX
XX XX X X X X XX XX
XXXXXXX XX X X X X XX XX
XXXXXXX XX X X X X XX XX
XXXXX XX X X X X XX XX
XXXXXXXXX XX X X X X XX XX
X XX X X X X XX XX
XXXXX XX X X X X XX XX
XXXXX XX X X X X XX XX
X X X XX XX
X XX XX
X XX
X XX XX

XXXX
XX
X
XX

25
 8/8/2012

MERLIN - CALIBRATION RELATIONSHIPS

International Roughness Index (m/km)

IRI = 0.593 + .0471D

20
15
10 International Roughness Index

5
0
0 100 200 300 400
Merlin D (mm)

Roughness

26
 8/8/2012

FHWA IRI Thresholds for Interstate Highways

Description PSR Rating IRI NHS Ride
Quality
Very Good 4.0 1.0 m/km
(60 in/mi)
Good 3.5-3.9 1.0-1.5 m/km Acceptable
(60-94 in/mi) (0-2.7 m/km)
Fair 3.1-3.4 1.5-1.9 m/km
(95-119 in/mi)
Mediocre 2.6-3.0 1.9-2.7 m/km
(120-170 in/mi)
Poor ≤2.5 >2.7 m/km Less than
(>170 in/mi) Acceptable
(>2.7 m/km)

VOC versus
VOC IRI
vs. IRI offor
ACPHMA

2.0
Train
2.7
Vehicle Operation Cost ($/veh.-km)

Double-Unit
Single-Unit
1.5 Car

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Roughness (m/km)

27
 8/8/2012

VOC vs. IRI of BST

2.7
Vehicle Operation Cost ($/veh.-km)

2.5

2
Train
Double-Unit
1.5
Single-Unit
Car
1

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Roughness (m/km)

PAVEMENT EVALUATION AND MAINTENANCE

PROCEDURE

• COLLECT AND INTERPRET EXISTING DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION

AND MAINTENANCE

• CARRY OUT SURFACE CONDITION, ROUGHNESS AND

TRAFFIC SURVEYS

• CARRY OUT NON-DESTRUCTIVE STRUCTURAL TESTING AND

DESTRUCTIVE MATERIALS TESTING

• ESTABLISH THE CAUSE OF THE PAVEMENT DETERIORATION

• SELECT APPROPRIATE METHOD OF MAINTENANCE OR

REHABILITATION BASED ON RESIDUAL STRENGTH OF ROAD
AND CAUSES OF DETERIORATION

28
 8/8/2012

Design and construction data used to establish

lengths of road having a similar type of construction

Windscreen Traffic Roughness

survey survey survey

Sub-divide and permanently mark road

sections or representative lengths

Detailed condition
survey

Is
it a Yes
surfacing
problem?

No
No Is it
localised?

Structural and materials

testing Yes

Identify the causes of

pavement deterioration

Select appropriate method of

maintenance or rehabilitation

Figure 2.1 Road pavement evaluation and rehabilitation procedure

APPENDICES - ORN 18
Appendix A Detailed surface condition survey

Appendix B Road roughness measurements

Appendix C Deflection beam measurements

Appendix D Deflection beam survey procedure

Appendix E Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) test procedure

Appendix F TRL Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) test procedure

Appendix G Test pit procedure

Appendix H Sand patch test

Appendix I The portable skid-resistance tester

29
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Visual condition survey

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Pavement condition survey

During the detailed surface condition survey the nature, extent,
severity and position of the following defects are recorded.

 Cracking
 Pot holes and patching
 Edge failures and shoulders
 Rut depth
 Deformation (excluding rutting)
 Surfacing defects; eg bleeding, fretting, stripping
 Surface texture and aggregate polishing

30
 8/8/2012

Table 3.2 Data and common surface defects to be recorded

Road number The Nationally accepted route number
Form number Numbers to run consecutively
Date Day/month/year
Inspector Name of inspector
Start location If an established marker is available it should be used. If not, permanent
markers such as junctions should be used.

Direction The direction towards a permanent feature, preferably a large town.

Road width Road width should be recorded at the beginning of each form
Surfacing Type (asphalt/bituminous seal)
Shoulder Type (gravel/sealed) and width
Chainage Chainage 0+000 is at the start point. If 50m blocks are used then following
chainages will be 0+050, 0+100 etc.

Crack type Letters L, T, B, C or P (Section 3.5.1)

Crack intensity Nos 0-5 (Section 3.5.2)
Crack position Letters V, O or CW (Section 3.5.3)
Crack width Nos 1-4 (Section 3.5.4)
Crack extent Nos 1-3 (Section 3.5.5) Extent as in Table 3.3
Pot holes and patching As defined in Section 3.6. Extent as Figure 3.2

Edge failures F or S (Section 3.7). Extent as Table 3.3

Rut depth Section 3.8. Maximum value recorded in either the vergeside or offside
wheelpath. If shoving is occurring the value should be circled.

Depressions As defined in Section 3.8. Extent as Table 3.3

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Table 3.3 Extent of defects

Length of block affected Extent = 1
Extent
(%)
1 <10
2 10-50
3 >50

Extent = 2

Extent = 3

31
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Paved Road Condition Survey Date Inspector District
Road No Start Km Direction From To

Block No Left Right

Comments/Actions
Severity Extent Severity Extent

Figure 3.2 Field Survey Form for Pavement Evaluation

Silt
Side drain
Erosion
Deform
Shoulder Erosion
Vegetation
Edge step
Edge damage
Rut depth
Type

Cracking
Intensity
Position
Extent
Width
Potholes/patching
Bleeding
Fretting
Corrugations
Surface texture
Aggregate polishing
ERA

Block No Left Right

Comments/Actions
Severity Extent Severity Extent
Silt
Side drain
Erosion
Deform
Shoulder Erosion
Vegetation
Edge step
Edge damage
Rut depth
Type
Cracking

Intensity
Position
Extent
Width
Potholes/patching
Bleeding
Fretting
Corrugations
Surface texture
Aggregate polishing

LOCALISED DEFECTS
Table 4.1 Surfacing defects - roads with thin bituminous seals
Maintenance
Defect Extent Notes
treatment
A fog spray may be sufficient to
<10% Local patching rejuvenate the surface and prevent
Fretting further fretting.
Surface dressing or
>10%
slurry seal
Local application of heated
Loss of stone, <10% No action aggregate may be required if poor
bleeding and skid resistance is a problem.
fatting-up Additional tests A new surfacing may be required
>10%
required
Loss of texture <10% No action
and/or polishing of Additional tests A new surfacing may be required
aggregate >10%
required
Potholes are the result of other
failures such as cracking and
Potholes Any Patch
deformation and additional tests will
usually be necessary
Patch the road and
Edge failures Any reconstruct the
shoulder

32
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Table 4.2 Surfacing defects - roads with asphalt surfacing

Maintenance
Defect Extent Notes
treatment
Application of a proprietary
<10% Local patching rejuvenator may prevent further
Fretting or fretting.
stripping Patching followed
>10% by surface dressing
or slurry seal
Local application of heated fine
<10% No action aggregate may be required if poor
Bleeding or skid resistance is a problem.
fatting-up
Additional tests A new surfacing may be required
>10%
required
Loss of texture <10% No Action
and/or polishing Additional tests A new surfacing may be required
of aggregate >10%
required
Potholes are the result of other
failures such as cracking and
Potholes Any Patching
deformation and additional tests will
usually be necessary
Patch road and
Edge failures Any reconstruct the
shoulder

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Performance chart
8

6
Damage Index Is [-]

0
178+600
173+350
168+100
162+850
153+200
148+000
142+700
137+500
132+200
127+000
121+500
116+200
110+900
105+400

5+300
0+300
99+600
94+410
89+100
83+900
78+900
73+600
68+400
63+100
57+900
52+650
47+400
42+100
36+800
31+500
26+300
21+000
15+800
10+500

Station [km]

33
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

5
Pavement Quality Rating Qi [-]

5+300
0+300
178+600
173+350
168+100
162+850
153+200
148+000
142+700
137+500
132+200
127+000
121+500
116+200
110+900
105+400
99+600
94+410
89+100
83+900
78+900
73+600
68+400
63+100
57+900
52+650
47+400
42+100
36+800
31+500
26+300
21+000
15+800
10+500
Station [km]

FLOW CHARTS THAT DESCRIBE

• RUTTING WITHOUT SHOVING

• RUTTING WITH SHOVING
• WHEELPATH CRACKING - ASPHALT SURFACING
• WHEELPATH CRACKING - THIN BITUMINOUS SEAL
• NON-WHEELPATH CRACKING - ASPHALT SURFACING
• NON-WHEELPATH CRACKING - THIN BITUMINOUS SEAL

34
 8/8/2012

ASPHALT/THIN BITUMINOUS SEAL

Rutting without shoving

Is the
NO past directional YES
traffic loading
significantly
different?

Is there
Is there a significant
a relation difference in the
NO between rut depth and NO
rutting for each direction
maximum deflection/ that relates to the
modified structural past traffic
No.? loading?

YES YES

Initial deterioration is the result

of excessive traffic loading
and/or inadequate pavement
layer thickness for
subgrade strength

Initial deterioration
is the result of
secondary
compaction

1
5

1
0
Rutdepth(m)

0
0 0
.
5 1
.
0 1
.
5

D
e
fl
ect
i
o n
(m
m)

35
 8/8/2012

ASPHALT/THIN BITUMINOUS SEAL

Rutting with shoving

Type of
ASPHALT THIN BITUMINOUS
bituminous
SURFACING surfacing? SEAL

Is Is the
rutting thickness YES
confined NO of the roadbase or
to the sub-base substantially
surfacing? less than
specified?

YES NO

Destructive sampling
of bituminous
surfacing and lab.
testing Is the
strength of the
roadbase or sub-base
substantially less
Is NO than specified? YES
YES material in NO
specification?

Initial deterioration is the Initial deterioration is the Initial deterioration Initial deterioration
result of inappropriate result of poor quality is the result of is the result of
surfacing material for surfacing material excessive wheel inadequate roadbase
temperature and/or loads and/or sub-base
loading regime

ASPHALT SURFACING
Wheelpath cracking

Is it the OVERLAY
original surfacing
or an overlay?

NO Are
YES
they
ORIGINAL reflection
SURFACING
Are cracks?
failures Are
confined to P C, T & B NO
YES Type of they
areas of severe cracking? crocodile See Figures 8.7 & 8.8
acceleration or cracks?
braking?
YES
L
Is Is
NO there a there a
Are poor bond NO relation between
they short between the radius of curvature
cracks? surfacing and the or deflection and YES
YES NO underlying occurrence of
Initial deterioration is the layer? cracking?
NO
result of slippage caused
YES
by general inappropriate
construction technique Initial deterioration
Initial deterioration is the
is the result of
result of inappropriate
excessive flexure
construction technique
of the surfacing
Short longitudinal cracks in the
wheelpath are often the beginnings
Initial deterioration is the of fatigue cracking (see Fig. 8.9). Long longitudinal cracks are often Premature cracking
result of slippage caused the result of subgrade movement. of this type can Initial deterioration is the
They invariably start at the top
by localised inappropriate They tend to be associated with result from poor result of inappropriate
of the surfacing as a result of
construction technique a vertical step across the crack. surfacing material construction technique
the ageing of the binder

36
 8/8/2012

ASPHALT SURFACING
Non-wheelpath cracking

Is it OVERLAY
the original Is it
surfacing or an reflection
overlay? cracking?
YES

NO
ORIGINAL
SURFACING

Type of cracking
Initial deterioration is the
result of inappropriate
construction technique

Longitudinal Transverse Block Crocodile

cracking cracking cracking cracking
(See Figure 8.6) (See Figure 8.7) (See Figure 8.8) (See para 8.28)

ASPHALT SURFACING
Transverse cracking

Is
there Are they
a chemically YES reflection cracks YES
stabilised roadbase from a lower
or sub-base? pavement
layer?

NO NO

Are
YES the cracks
See Figure 8.8 associated with
longitudinal
cracks?

NO

Do
YES Are the NO
YES the cracks
cracks irregularly
extend the full
spaced at > 20m
width of the
spacing? Initial deterioration is
road?
Initial deterioration is the result of reflection
the result of differential cracking from
movements at a structure NO stabilised layer
such as culverts
Initial deterioration is the Initial deterioration is the
result of thermal stresses result of thermal or
at construction joints shrinkage stresses

37
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

6.3. Deflection measurements and back-calculation of

elastic moduli

Structural Evaluation—Pavement Deflections

• A tolerable level of deflection is a function of traffic and the

pavement structural section.

• Overlaying a pavement with HMA will reduce its

deflection. The thickness needed to reduce the deflection
to a tolerable level can be estimated.

• The deflections experienced by a pavement varies

throughout the year due to temperature and moisture
changes.

38
 8/8/2012

Primary Types of Deflection Measuring Devices

Commonly Used

• Static (Benkelman Beam)

• Impulse (Falling Weight Deflectometer - FWD)

Benkelman Beam

39
 8/8/2012

Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD)

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

40
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Principle of falling weight deflectometer

M

When do you use the FWD?

The FWD is a specialist survey tool that can provide
much useful information. It should be used for
gaining detailed information about a particular length
of road. This may include:
• Roads in need of structural maintenance, (plus
comparisons with good pavements).
• Investigatory surveys - e.g. to determine cause
of deterioration.
• Compliance testing for new construction/
rehabilitation.
• Research.

41
 8/8/2012

Distribution of Wheel Load

Wheel
Load

Asphalt
Base

Subbase

Natural soil

Pavement Responses Under Load

Axle
Load

Surface  SUR d SUR

Base/Subbase  SUB
Subgrade Soil

42
 8/8/2012

Measurement of Surface Deflection

NDT
Load NDT Sensors

di d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9
Distance from 0 200 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100
load center [mm]

Table 2: Standard geophone setup in several countries

Distance (mm) from centre of loading plate

Country & Pavement type Geophone number (where d1 = load centre)
d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7
Philippines: asphalt & concrete* 0 200 300 450 650 900 1500
UK: Asphalt & flex comp.** 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 2100
UK: Concrete (mid slab) 0 300 600 900 1350 1800 2250
UK: Concrete (joint test) 0 200 300 600 900 1350 1800
USA Concrete 0 203 305 457 610 915 1524
(8") (12") (18") (24") (36") (60")

* SMEC, 1992. Pavement Management System: FWD Testing

Guidelines for Network Strength Surveys, DPWH/ADB
** Flex comp = flexible composition, i.e. asphalt over concrete
References: UK = HD29/94, 1994, USA = AASHTO, 1998

43
 8/8/2012

Diagram showing the FWD deflection bowl

(From: UK Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Vol. 7: HD29/99)
A standard deflection method (Benkelman beam) may tell you
there is a problem at a particular location.
From the FWD bowl pattern, you can determine where the
problem is in the pavement, e.g. upper pavement layers or
foundation.

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

[Surface [Air [Target [ForceP

Temp Temp Load eak [D1 [D2 [D3 [D4 [D5 [D6 [D7 [D8 [D9
Station °C] °C] kN] kN] µm] µm] µm] µm] µm] µm] µm] µm] µm]
0+000 28 30 50 41 736 473 326 130 78 57 46 37 30
0+000 23 23 39 43 812 581 422 153 69 47 44 34 28
0+100 30 29 50 42 571 406 291 109 71 52 43 35 33
0+200 17 19 50 44 1044 780 612 274 134 87 74 65 54
0+300 30 29 50 41 904 687 526 237 126 75 55 39 27
0+400 16 19 50 41 952 722 559 234 114 76 65 49 41
0+501 29 29 50 40 684 508 407 197 105 63 46 32 27
0+600 18 18 50 44 933 541 366 140 72 53 51 44 40
0+690 29 29 50 42 908 653 472 132 52 45 34 25 22
0+800 19 20 50 43 862 563 400 150 90 68 58 46 39
0+900 30 28 50 41 887 507 331 106 60 47 42 35 29
1+000 18 20 50 43 681 482 364 162 94 67 54 43 34
1+101 29 28 50 41 613 397 276 119 82 62 52 42 33
1+200 18 21 50 45 596 456 364 171 90 60 50 42 35
1+300 28 27 50 42 260 182 139 75 55 40 33 27 22
1+408 18 21 50 43 470 347 268 107 52 29 23 16 14
1+500 27 27 50 42 454 340 260 133 91 67 57 48 40
1+600 19 21 50 42 446 323 244 112 67 45 39 30 26

44
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

800.0 d0

700.0 d1500

SCI
Deflection [m]

600.0
BDI
500.0

400.0

300.0

200.0

100.0

0.0
70+000 75+000 80+000 85+000 90+000
Station [km]

Structural Evaluation with Deflections

• Maximum deflection (D0)
• Area Parameter (A) or Curvature Parameters
• Subgrade Modulus (MR)
• Back-Calculation of elastic moduli of each layer

45
 8/8/2012

Area Parameter

Curvature Parameter

Surface curvature index (SCI) = d0 – d600

Base damage index (BDI) = d300 – d600

Subgrade Modulus (quick estimate)

(from AASHTO 93 Guide)

0.258𝑃
𝑀𝑅 = in SI unit i.e. MPa, N, mm
𝑑𝑟 𝑟

46
 8/8/2012

Typical Values of Subgrade Moduli

Simple Backcalculation Case

b
δ
PL3 bh3
δ= I=
L/2 48EI 12
L

47
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Back calculation of layer moduli

• Important in pavement evaluation

• Back calculated stiffness modulus reveals damage condition

• One of the drawback

• Accurate information on thickness of the various layers is required as
deflection ~ E.h3

• Although various computer programs are available that

back-calculate the layer moduli it is not straight-forward

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Surface modulus
• According to Boussinesq’s theory, the elastic modulus of a
homogeneous half space:

E = .a2.(1-2)/dr.r

E = 2..a.(1-2)/d0
• load is distributed depends on the
thickness and the stiffness
• only that part of the pavement that is
subjected to stresses, will deform
• the geophone that is farthest away from
the load center (geophone a) only
measures deformations in the subgrade
• geophone in the load center (geophone
b) measures the deformations in the
subgrade, base and top layer

48
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

900
800 Surface Modulus 10+000
700 Surface modulus 11+000

Surface Modulus [Mpa]

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Equivalent depth [mm]

• surface modulus plot assists in deciding how many layers

should be taken into account in the back calculation analysis
• number of layers to be considered is not only the number of
physical layers, top, base, sub-base and subgrade; one also
has to take into account the fact that within one layer, sublayers
may occur with a different stiffness

Backcalculation
Typical Pavement Case

NDT Load Layer

r Characteristics

Surface E1 1 D1

Base /
E2 2 D2
Subbase
Subgrade E3 3
Soil 

49
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

• Back calculation of layer moduli from measured deflection

bowls is done in an iterative way
• input for the calculations
• the measured deflection profile
• the load geometry used to generate the deflections
• the thickness of the layers
• moduli values are assigned to the various layers and the
deflections are calculated
• the calculated deflections are compared with the
measured ones
• if the differences are too large, a new set of moduli is
assumed and the deflections are calculated again

• a golden rule in the back calculation analyses is that it is

not recommended to vary the moduli values of all layers
in the same time

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Radial distance [mm]

0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100
0
50
100 Measured
Deflection [m]

150 Trial1
200 Trial2
250 Trial3
300
350
400
450

50
 8/8/2012

Back calculation Models

Layer Properties
Computed
1.0
E1 E2 E3 Subgrade
OUTPUT LAYER Moduli
ILLI-PAVE
0.5
HIDDEN
LAYER(S)

INPUT LAYER 0.0

d0 d1… …d5 0.0 0.5 1.0
Target

Deflection Basins
?
Computed = Measured

Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP)

• How to do test

• How to analyse data

• How to calculate Structural Number

51
 8/8/2012

1
K
e
y:
-
1H and
l
e
2H ammer(8kg
)
3H ammershaf
t 2 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
4C oup
l
ing
5H and
guard
6C l
ampri
ng
7S t
and
ardshaf
t
81 m e
t
rerul
e 3
96 0
° c
one

Ø
20
mm

7
9

9
· 6
0°
INC

1. Kleyn and Van Heerden, 1983 (60° cone)

2. Smith and Pratt, 1983 (30° cone)
3. Van Vuuren, 1969 (30° cone)
4. TRRL, 1990 (60° cone)

100
CBR (per cent)

50

10

5 3
4
1
2

1
1 5 10 50 100
DCP (mm/blow)
1. Log10 (CBR) = 2.632 - 1.28 Log10 (mm/blow)
2. Log10 (CBR) = 2.555 - 1.145 Log10 (mm/blow)
3. Log10 (CBR) = 2.503 - 1.15 Log10 (mm/blow)
4. Log10 (CBR) = 2.48 - 1.057 Log10 (mm/blow)

DCP - CBR RELATIONSHIP

52
 8/8/2012

DCP TEST

Site/road: Date: DCP Test

Test No: Date:_______________
Section No/Chainage: Zero reading of DCP: ________
Direction: Started test at: Site/Road Addis Ababa -
Wheel path: Gohatsion
No. No. No. Test
Blows Blows mm Blows Blows mm Blows Blows mm No._______________________
Section No.Chainage Zero reading of DCP:
115+000 RHS 100
Started test at:
Direction:________________________ Subgrade
Wheel Path:
______________________

No. ∑ No. ∑ No. ∑

mm mm mm
Blows Blows Blows Blows Blows Blows
1 150

1 180

1 210

1 230

1 250

1 265
1 280
1 295
1 315
1 330
1 340
3 345
5 350
5 355
10 360
10 362
10 362

No. of blows
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220

100

200
*
* *
300 **
** *
* *
* * *
400 * *
** *
* *
* **
500 *
**
* *
*
Depth (mm)

600 **
*
*
*
700 *
*
*
*
800 *
*
*
900
*
*
1000
*
*
1100
*
*
1200 *

Typical DCP test result

53
 8/8/2012

No. of blows
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220

100

200
*
* *
300 **
** *
* *
* * *
400 * *
** *
* *
* **
500
*
**
Depth (mm)

* *
*
600 **
*
*
*
700 *
*
*
*
800 *
*
*
900
*
*
1000
*
*
1100
*
*
1200 *

Typical DCP test result

No. of blows

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220

100
216mm Bituminous surfacing
(Direct measurement)

200
*
* *
300 ** 284mm Crushed stone roadbase
** *
* * DCP = 1.9 mm/blow
** *
400 * * CBR = > 100 per cent
** *
* *
* **
500 * 110mm Sub-base 1
**
* * DCP = 3.4 mm/blow
Depth (mm)

*
600 ** CBR = 83 per cent
* 150mm Sub-base 2
*
700 * DCP = 5.1 mm/blow
*
* CBR = 54 per cent
*
800 *
*
* Subgrade
*
900 DCP = 27.1 mm/blow
*
CBR = 9 per cent
*
1000
*
*
1100
*
*
1200 *
Typical DCP test result

54
 8/8/2012

Number of blows
0 40 80 120 160
0
100 Roadbase
Thickness 266 mm
200 CBR 41 per cent

300
400 Sub-base
Thickness 380 mm
Depth (mm)

500 CBR 20 per cent

600
700 Gravel surfacing
Thickness 220 mm
800 CBR >100 per cent

900
Subgrade
1000 CBR 13 per cent
1100
1200

Typical DCP result

STRUCTURAL NUMBER
i
SN = 0.0394 ai di
o
where ai = Layer coefficient of layer i
di = Thickness of layer i (mm)

MODIFIED STRUCTURAL NUMBER

SNC = SN + 3.51 (log10 CBR) -

0.85 (log10 CBR)2 - 1.43

55
 8/8/2012

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

6.4. Design of Overlays

“Pavement rehabilitation is as much an art as a

science. With the exception of certain overlay
models presented elsewhere, there are no
definitive equations, guides or step-by-step
procedures that one can use to ‘cook book’ a
proper rehabilitation design. Therefore a
considerable amount of both analysis and
engineering judgment must be applied to each
project”

AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (Chapter III Section 2.3)

One of the first step in design of overlays or other

rehabilitation is to divide the road project into
homogenous sections

CUMULATIVE SUM METHOD TO

IDENTIFY HOMOGENEOUS SECTIONS

Si = xi - xm + Si-1

where xI = Deflection at chainage i

xm = Mean deflection

Si = Cumulative sum of the

deviations from the mean deflection
at chainage i

56
 8/8/2012

CUMULATIVE SUM METHOD FOR CALCULATING

HOMOGENEOUS SECTIONS

8
Set No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7
IRI = 2.01 410 2. 2.57 2.05 1.87 3.63
6

5
E[IRI] (m/km)

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Chainage (km)

CUMULATIVE SUM METHOD FOR CALCULATING

HOMOGENEOUS SECTIONS
30

20

10
Cumulative Sum (m/km)

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Chainage (kms)

57
 8/8/2012

Cumulative Sum of Deviations from the Mean

30

20

10

Cumulative Sum (m/km)

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Chainage (kms)

Roughness Profile
8

Sect No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7
IRI = 2.01 4.10 2.36 2.57 2.05 1.87 3.63
6

5
E[IRI] (m/km)

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Chainage (km)

Cumulative sum method for analysing roughness results

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

800.0 d0
700.0 d1500
SCI
600.0
Deflection [m]

BDI
500.0
400.0
300.0
200.0
100.0
0.0
70+000 75+000 80+000 85+000 90+000
Station [km]

0.50
0.00
-0.50
Cum. Sum [mm]

-1.00
-1.50
-2.00 Cum. d0
-2.50 Cum. d1500
-3.00 Cum. SCI
-3.50 Cum. BDI
Cum. d0 temp. corr.
-4.00
70+000 75+000 80+000 85+000 90+000
station [km]

58
 8/8/2012

Pavement Rehabilitation
Types of overlay design procedures

• Engineering judgment

• Component analysis: Widely used in a number of

applications/design procedures

• Nondestructive testing with limiting deflection: Still

used with measurement instruments such as the
Benkelman Beam and FWD.

• Mechanistic-empirical: This is the primary HMA

overlay design method used by different agencies.
This approach is gaining acceptance in many
countries.

Pavement Rehabilitation
Component Analysis
• The Asphalt Institute (AI) approach

• A number of HMA overlay design procedures use a similar

approach. In effect, you start by determining the ―effective
thickness‖ of the existing pavement structure. Then, a ―new‖
pavement structure is designed and the difference in the two
structures (new – effective) amounts to the overlay thickness. To
use the AI approach, the following is required:
• Subgrade analysis
• Traffic analysis
• Pavement structure thickness analysis ( determine effective thickness
of existing and all new design for the given subgrade and traffic).

59
 8/8/2012

Component Analysis

Component Analysis

60
 8/8/2012

Component Analysis

Component Analysis
(―Figure 1‖)

61
 8/8/2012

Asphalt Institute Full-Depth (TN)

(actual figure from AI)

If Mr = 10,000 psi and design ESALs = 1,000,000, then HMA full-

depth thickness = 8.4 inches

Pavement Rehabilitation
Limiting Pavement Surface Deflections
Limiting pavement surface deflections—Asphalt
Institute
• Surface deflections can be taken with a variety of deflection devices.
Typically, this is either the Benkelman Beam (BB) or the Falling
Weight Deflectometer (FWD).

• Compute the Representative Rebound Deflection (RRD). You must

consider the time of the year during which the deflections are taken.

• The overlay thickness is a function of ESALs and RRD

62
 8/8/2012

Representative Rebound Deflection (RRD)

Standard deviation of
deflection
measurements

RRD = ( x  2 s )( f )(c) Critical period adjustment

factor (c = 1 if
measurements made
during the most critical
Mean of period)
deflection
measurements
Temperature
adjustment
factor

Limiting pavement surface deflections—

Asphalt Institute

63
 8/8/2012

Limiting pavement surface deflections—

Asphalt Institute

Pavement Rehabilitation
AASHTO Overlay Design Procedure (1993)

• Overlay design considerations

• Pre-overlay repair including level-up or milling
• Reflection crack control
• Traffic (ESALs mostly)
• Subdrainage
• Rutting – understand cause(s)

64
 8/8/2012

Pavement Rehabilitation
AASHTO Overlay Design Procedure (1993)

• HMA Overlay of HMA Pavement

SNol = (aol)(Dol) = SNf - SNeff

In effect, this is similar to the component analysis

approach discussed earlier.
Further, MR and SNeff can be determined from
nondestructive tests.

Effective modulus, EP
1
145.033 1 − 2
𝐷
1+
145.033 𝑎
𝑑0 = 10.343𝑝𝑎 +
2
𝐸𝑃
𝐷 3 𝐸𝑃
𝑀𝑅 1+
𝑎 𝑀𝑅

d0 = deflection measured at the center of the load plate (and adjusted to a

standard temperature of 20oC) [mm]
p = deflection load plate pressure [kPa]
a = deflection load plate radius [mm]
D = total thickness of pavement layers above the subgrade [mm]
MR = subgrade resilient modulus [MPa]
EP = effective modulus of all pavement layers above the subgrade [MPa]

𝑆𝑁𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 0.000856𝐷 3 𝐸𝑃

65
 8/8/2012

ERA or ORN 18 Overlay Design Procedure

• Calculate representative deflection (90th percentile value)

Rep. deflection = xm + 1.3 SD

0.036+0.818𝐷𝑟 −𝐷𝑑
𝑇=
0.0027𝐷𝑟
Where:
Dd = design defl [mm]
Dr = repr. Defl [mm]
T = overlay thickness [mm]

Calibration of deflection life criterion

8/7/2012 Alemgena Alene, PhD CENG6302 - Ch6 MU-EiT

Assignment II

66