FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

BCV 204: CIVIL ENGINEERING PROJECT III

BY

GROUP SIX

LECTURER: MR. SOLOMON NTOW DENSU

 GROUP MEMBERS

NAMES INDEX NUMBERS

DIEDONG JESSE ANGSOANAA BC/CVE/21/019

ASMAH JOJO EBENEZER BC/CVE/21/021

APPIAH GODWIN BC/CVE/21/024

OSEI BOAKYEWAA BLESSING BC/CVE/21/026

ADJEI-BOATENG EBENEZER BC/CVE/21/033

LETSA ISAAC BC/CVE/21/035

APPIAH PHILIP ASSIAMAH BC/CVE/21/042

QUAYSON BELINDA ADJOA BC/CVE/21/050

KWAW NICHOLAS JASPER BC/CVE/21/067

GYEBI NANA YAW PINTO BC/CVE/21/073

FRANK OKYERE BC/CVE/21/080

 ABSTRACT
An important part of forming highways and transportation plans is through designing better
roadway. The roads in urban areas are places of great importance. However, too many curves at
sections of a road without any apparent reason can create serious problems. Solving of this
problem significantly influences the future position and functions of current through roads in
urban road networks. The purpose of this project is to redesign the assigned road in Sekondi-
Takoradi Metropolis (STM) specifically Cedar Close Avenue located at Windy Ridge. The
motive of the project is to help us in improving the quality of the roadway as well as enhancing
the comfort of the road user, both the driver and the pedestrian. As part of the objective of this
project is to determine the total length of the roadway, to design both the horizontal and vertical
alignment, to determine the traffic growth rate, and to determine the total volume of cut and fill
and to investigate the durability and strength of pavement material.
 DECLARATION
We solemnly declare that to the best of our knowledge; no part of this report has been submitted
here or elsewhere in the previous application for award of a degree. All source of knowledge
used has duly acknowledge. We understand that copy right infringement and plagiarism
constitute a breach of Takoradi Technical University academic rules and conduct and will be
dealt with accordingly.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, we thank the Almighty GOD, for wisdom, knowledge, understanding, good
health and a favorable weather may His name be praised forever.

Also, we wish to express our sincere gratitude to our lecturer and supervisor, Mr. Solomon Ntow
Densu whose guidance, support and corrections has made us come out successfully with this
piece of work. Our warm gratitude also goes to the management of the Civil Engineering
Department for allowing us to conduct such a project. Finally, our profound appreciation goes to
all persons who in diverse ways have contributed to the success of this project especially Dr.
John Jackson Nsiah, Head of Civil Department, TTU.
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................3

DECLARATION.............................................................................................................................4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...............................................................................................................5

CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................7

1.1 Background of Study.............................................................................................................7

1.2 Problem Statement.................................................................................................................7

1.3 Aim Of Project.......................................................................................................................7

1.4 Objectives...............................................................................................................................7

CHAPTER 2 (LITERATURE REVIEW).......................................................................................8

2.1 FIELD AND STUDY AREA................................................................................................8

2.2 Design Criteria.......................................................................................................................9

2.3 Design Speed........................................................................................................................10

2.4 Desk Study...........................................................................................................................10

CHAPTER THREE (METHODOLOGY)....................................................................................10

3.1 Data Collection....................................................................................................................10

3.2 SOIL TESTING...................................................................................................................12

3.4 VERTICAL ALIGNMENT.................................................................................................25

3.5 HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT DESIGN...........................................................................30

3.6 TRAFFIC VOLUME DETERMINATION.........................................................................32

3.7 PAVEMENT DESIGN........................................................................................................37

3.8 DRAINAGE DESIGN.........................................................................................................40

CHAPTER FOUR.........................................................................................................................46

CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................46
CHAPTER FIVE...........................................................................................................................47

RECCOMMENDATION..............................................................................................................47

REFERENCE................................................................................................................................48
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of Study
A road is a wide way leading from one place to the other, especially with a prepared
surface which vehicles can use. Road consist of one or more roadways, each with one
or more lanes and any associated sidewalks and road verges. Road and highways are
travel way on which human, animals and wheeled vehicles can move. In modern
usage, the term road describes a rural, lesser travel way whilst the word street denotes
an urban roadway. Highway refers to a major rural travel way. More recently it has
been used for roads in either rural or urban areas where points of entrance and exit
for traffic are limited or controlled.

1.2 Problem Statement

The Ministry of Roads and Highways (MRH) has earmarked a minor secondary road
located in the Sekondi-Takoradi Metropolis (STM), however, it is out of shape, due
to poor maintenance management practices over the years. A major component of
the project development aims to redesign the existing assigned road.

Consequently, the 4-YR BTECH CIVIL 2 Group 6 has been tasked to undertake the
redesign of the road that leads to one of the subareas of windy ridge (Cedar close)

1.3 Aim Of Project

The aim of the project is to redesign the existing assign road

1.4 Objectives
The scope of works for the highway specialist to be undertaken was:

I. Determine the total length of the road

II. Design the horizontal and vertical alignments
III. Determine or choose a growth rate of traffic
IV. Determine the total volume of cut and fill
V. Design the pavement structure
 CHAPTER 2 (LITERATURE REVIEW)
2.1 FIELD AND STUDY AREA
Windy Ridge is an old suburban area in Takoradi of which Cedar Close Avenue constitutes one
of the street or road network in the vicinity. Cedar Close Avenue is the road linking the sugar
maple avenue to the Aetherius society church. Group 6 members got to the area to acquaint
ourselves with the conditions of the area. These were the observations we made

1. The area is an already built up community.

2. There is an existing road network system which needs to be redesigned

due to its bad state

3. The existing roads are mainly surface dressed roads

4. The roads are of varying widths at several sections

The soil type on the proposed roads ranges from sandy to hard lateritic portions.

Site Map

Figure 1.1

2.2 Design Criteria

These guides/codes are to be used:
 • Road Design Guide (Ghana Highway Authority, 1991)

• The Transport Research Laboratory (OVERSEAS ROAD NOTE 31)

• The Transport Research Laboratory (OVERSEAS ROAD NOTE 40)

• The Transport Research Laboratory (OVERSEAS ROAD NOTE 5)

2.3 Design Speed

A design speed of 40km/hr has been chosen for the design. This was done taking into
consideration the functional classification and terrain type of the roadway. (minor secondary
road)

2.4 Desk Study

A desk study was done before going to the field each day. The people present at the desk study
meeting were all the members of group one. The main objectives of the desk study is

 Discuss the work to be done on the field that particular day.

 Identify the instruments that will be needed to do the job for that particular day.
 Estimate the amount of time that will be spent at the site that particular day.
 Identify some of the challenges we are likely to face at the site and find ways to
overcome them.
 CHAPTER THREE (METHODOLOGY)
3.1 Data Collection
Site reconnaissance was conducted at the preliminary stage of the project. Site reconnaissance
being the first stage of site investigation, Group 3 members ensured that there was a visual
inspection of the designated area to be considered and information about topographical (rise and
fall) and geological features (soil) of the roadway are collected. The actual length of the
proposed roadway was determined by employing the survey technique called chaining.

Survey Chaining technique was carried out to obtain only linear measurements on the proposed
roadway to be redesigned. Preceded by another survey technique called Levelling. Levelling is
done to establish the elevation of a point relative to a datum. This technique was carried out to
determine the height of one level relative to the other on the proposed roadway.

Soil Testing Analysis was performed on the soil to determine the suitability of the soil and assess
whether it can accommodate the proposed road project. The testing of soil is done to determine
the strength of the soil, density, compaction, sand content, moisture content, physical and
chemical properties of the soil and assess their impact on the proposed project.

Also, the vertical alignment of the road, that is the presence of heights and depths in vertical axis
with respect to horizontal axis of alignment was determined. These heights and depths attributed
to the proposed roadway forms its gradient. Gradient is defined as the ratio of the difference in
height of its extremes to the horizontal length between them. It also aid in the

determination of the crest and sag nature of the road. In simple terms, the rise and fall
components on the roadway.

Conversely, the Horizontal alignment was also carried out to determine the location of the Point
of Intersection and the angles (deflection angle) to which they coincide

on the roadway. This was applied to the curve components of the roadway. The Horizontal
alignment knowledge acquisition informed the members of the Group of the fact that if a
horizontal curve has a high design speed and a small radius, and increased super elevation, also
referred to as bank is needed in order to assure safety on the road.
Lastly, the soil testing results also provided us with an information on the type of soil material;
whether it is a sub-base material or a base material. The soil suitability and feasibility in terms of
its ability to distribute the applied vehicle loads to the sub-grade. The knowledge of the
characteristics of the soil informed us on type of Pavement design to be used to accommodate the
applied loads that will be impacted on the roadway. The design criteria in the OVERSEAS

ROAD NOTE 31 (TRL, UK), given that the CBR of the subgrade beneath the existing road is
3%

3.2 SOIL TESTING

ATTERBERG LIMIT TEST

The Atterberg limits test is a classification test used to determine the moisture content at which
fine-grained clay and silt soils transition between the solid, semi-solid, plastic, and liquid
states. The Atterberg limit refers to the liquid limit and plastic limit of soil. These two limits are
used internationally for soil identification, classification, and strength correlations. When clay
minerals are present in fine-grained soil, the soil can be remolded in the presence of some
moisture without crumbling. This cohesiveness is caused by the adsorbed water surrounding the
clay particles. At a very low moisture content, soil behaves more like a solid; at a very high
moisture content, the soil and water may flow like a liquid. Hence on an arbitrary basis,
depending on the moisture content, the behavior of soil can be divided into the four basic states:
solid, semisolid, plastic, and liquid.

Purpose: This laboratory test is performed to determine the liquid limits, liquid limit and
plasticity index of a fine-grained soil.

There are two main tests under Atterberg limit. That is;

1. Liquid Limit Test

2. Plastic Limit Test

LIQUID LIMIT TEST

The liquid limit (LL) is arbitrarily defined as the water content, in percent, at which a part of soil
in a standard cup and cut by a groove of standard dimensions will flow together at the base of the
groove for a distance of 13 mm (1/2 in.) when subjected to 25 shocks from the cup being
dropped 10 mm in a standard liquid limit apparatus operated at a rate of two shocks per second.

Equipment used

 Casagrande apparatus

 Evaporating dish

 Flat grooving tool

 Three moisture cans

 Electric Balance

 Spatula

 Wash bottle filled with distilled water

 Drying oven set at 105°

Test procedure

 Three empty moisture cans were weighed and recorded their respective weight and
can numbers.

 The soil sample was placed through 0.425mm sieve to obtain a very smooth texture
of the soil.
  Three-quarter of the soil was placed in an evaporating dish and thoroughly mixed
with small amount of distilled water to form uniform smooth paste.

 A portion of the smooth soil paste was placed in the Casagrande’s cup and a spatula
was used to smoothen the surface so that the maximum depth is about 10mm. Using
the grooving tool, a clean straight groove was carefully cut down the center of the
cup.

 The Casagrande apparatus was cranked at a rate of 2 revolutions per second until
there is a clear visible closure in the soil pat placed in the cup. The number of blows
(N) that caused the closure was counted and recorded.

 A sample was collected from the closed part of the cup using a spatula and was
placed in a moisture can. The moisture can together with the soil was weighed,
recorded and placed in an oven for 24 hours.

 The remaining soil in the cup was placed back into the evaporating dish. The cup on
the Casagrande apparatus and the grooving tool was then cleaned and dried. The
entire soil paste was remixed in the evaporating dish.

 A small amount of distilled water was added to increase the water content so that the
number of drops required to close the groove decreased.

 The previous steps were repeated for two additional trials producing successively
lower numbers of drops to close the groove. One of the trials was for a closure
requiring 23 to 27 drops and one for closure between 15 and 23 drops, and one trial
for a closure requiring 15 to 25 drops. The water content of each trial was determined.

PLASTIC LIMIT TEST

Plastic limit (PL) is the moisture content at which a fine-grained soil cannot be remolded
without cracking. The plastic limit test requires repeated rolling of a soil sample into a thread
until it reaches a point where it crumbles. This laboratory test is performed to determine the
plastic and liquid limits of a fine-grained soil. The plastic limit is the water content, in percent, at
which a soil can no longer be deformed by rolling into 3mm diameter threads without crumbling.

Equipment used

 Evaporating dish

 Two moisture cans

 Balance

 Glass plate

 Spatula

 Drying oven set at 105°C.

Test Procedure

 Two empty moisture cans were weighed and recorded their respective weight and can
numbers.

 A portion of the smooth soil paste was taken and small amount of the remaining one-
quarter of the original soil sample was added gradually until the soil is at a consistency
where it can be rolled without sticking to the hands.

 A small, ellipsoidal-shaped masses of soil was molded and rolled on the glass plate to
form a thread-like material of 2mm.

 The thread-like soil was broken into pieces into the moisture can, weighed and recorded
it mass and placed in a drying oven set at 105°C for 24 hours.

 An adequate amount of the original sample was added again to increase the plasticity of
the soil and was kneaded, molded and rolled on the glass plate to 2mm till it crumbles.

 The crumbled thread-like soil was gathered into a moisture can, weighed and recorded
the mass and placed in the oven for 24 hours.
 DATA ANALYSIS

TYPE OF TEST CASAGRANDE CUP LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT

TEST NUMBER 1 (27-40) 2 (23-27) 3 (15-23) 1 2
NUMBER OF BLOWS 36 24 18
CONTAINER NUMBER 1 2 3 4 5
MASS OF CONTAINER (g) 21.9 23.8 22 22 23
MASS OF CONTAINER + WET 32.5 45.3 35.8 22.9 23.8
SOIL
MASS OF CONTAINER +DRY SOIL 29.3 38.8 31.5 22.7 23.6
(g)
MASS OF WATER (g) 3.2 6.5 4.3 0.2 0.2
MASS OF DRY SOIL (g) 7.4 15 9.5 0.7 0.6
MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 43.24 43.33 43.41 28.57 33.33
AVERAGE (%) 30.95

Chart Title
43.45
43.41
43.40

43.35 43.33

43.30

43.24
43.25

43.20

43.15
10 100
Mass of soil(wet) = mass of can and wet soil – mass of empty can

Mass of dry soil = maas of can and dry soil – mass of empty can

Mass of water = mass of wet soil – mass of dry soil

Liquid limit (LL or Wl)% 43.33 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓

Water content =

�𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
⁄𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑒𝑡 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑥 100%
Plastic Limit (PL or Wp)% 30.95
�
Plasticity Index (PI)%- 12.38

Plasticity index = liquid limit (LL) – plasticity Limit(PL)

43.24+ 43.33+ 43.41

Liquid Limit (LL) % ꓿ = 43.33
3

28.57+33.33
Plastic Limit (PL) % = = 30.95
2

Plasticity index (PI) % = 43.33 – 30.95 = 12.38

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST

Particle size distribution test (PSDT) is a measurement of the size distribution of individual
soil/sediment particles, sand, silt and clay, which can be used to understand soil genesis, to
classify soil or to define texture.

Purpose: This test is performed in order to determine the percentage of different particle sizes
contained within a soil sample.

Equipment used

 Riffle box

 Electronic scale

 Set of sieves

 Cleaning brush

 Dry oven at 105°C

Test procedure

 An air-dried soil sample was quartered using a rifle box and a mass of 1500g was taken
for the test.

 The soil was washed thoroughly through 0.075mm sieve to get the actual particle sizes to
be analyzed and oven-dried for 24 hours at a temperature of 105°C.

 The mass of the particle is weighed and recorded. The weight of the pan to be used in the
analysis was taken and recorded.

 A set of clean sieves was assembled in the descending number of sieve size numbers
(#19mm sieve at top and #0.075sieve at bottom). The pan was placed below #19mm
sieve.

 The particles sample was poured into the sieve and shook until all the particles passed.
The weight of the retaining sample together with the pan was taken.
  The passing particle sizes was poured into the 10mm sieve and was shook for some
minutes. The retaining particle sizes together with the pan was weighed and recorded.

 The particle sizes that passed to the pan was poured into the 4.75mm sieve and the sieve
was shook. The retaining particles sizes and the pan was weighed.

 The passing particle sizes in the pan was poured into the 2.00mm sieve and the previous
steps were repeated until the last sieve #0.075mm.

 The mass of the retaining particle sizes on each sieve was obtained by subtracting the
weight of the pan from the total weight of the pan and particles.

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

Total Mass of Dry Sample 2860
Sieve size (mm) Mass Retain (g) % Retained % Passing
19 157.7 5.51 94.49
14 159.9 5.59 88.90
10 163 5.70 83.20
4.75 766.6 26.80 56.39
2.36 574.1 20.07 36.32
1.18 218.4 7.64 28.68
 0.6 177.3 6.20 22.48
0.3 346.45 12.11 10.37
0.15 189.8 6.64 3.73
0.07 106.1 3.71 0.02
Pan 0.65 0.02

Total mass of sample = 2860g

Total mass retained = 2860g

For % retained = 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 ⁄𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑥 100%

Sieve size 19mm = 157/2860 * 100% = 5.51%

Sieve size 14mm = 159.9/2860 * 100% = 5.59%

Sieve size 10mm = 163/2860 * 100% = 5.70%

Sieve size 4.75mm = 766.6/2860 * 100% = 26.80%

Sieve size 2.36mm = 574.1/2860 * 100% = 20.07%

Sieve size 1.18mm = 218.4/2860 * 100% = 7.64%

Sieve size 0.60mm = 177.3/2860 * 100% = 6.20%

Sieve size 0.300mm = 346.45/2860 * 100% = 12.11%

Sieve size 150microns = 189.8/2860 * 100% = 6.64%

Sieve size 75microns = 106.1/2860 * 100% = 3.71%

%passing = 100% - %retained

Sieve size 19mm = 100 – 5.1 = 94.49%

Sieve size 14mm = 94.49 – 5.59 = 88.9%

Sieve size 10mm passing = 88.90 – 5.70 = 83.20%

Sieve size 4.75mm passing = 83.20 – 26.80 = 56.39%

Sieve size 2.36mm passing = 56.39 – 20.07 = 36.32%

Sieve size 1.18mm passing = 36.32– 7.64 = 28.68%

Sieve size 0.600mm passing = 28.68 – 6.20 = 22.48%

Sieve size 0.300mm passing = 22.48 – 12.11 = 10.37%

Sieve size 150microns passing = 10.37 – 6.64 = 3.73%

Sieve size 75microns passing = 3.73 – 3.71 = 0.02%

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.01 0.1 1 10 100

DATA ANALYSIS
The uniformity of a soil is expressed quantitatively by a term known as Uniformity co-efficient
Cu, given by;

D60
Cu =
D10

5.5
=
0.30

= 18.33mm

Since CU > 4.0, then the soil is likely to be either well graded or gap graded

The larger the numerical value of Cu, the more is the range of particles. Soils with a value of Cu
less than 2 are uniform soils. Soils with a value of Cu of 6 or more are well-graded. Gravels with
a value of Cu of 4 or more are well-graded. However, it should be noted that the gap grading of
the soil cannot be detected by Cu only. The value of Cc is also required to detect it

The co-efficient of curvature (Cc) or co-efficient gradation (Cg) is given by the relation:

2
D 30
Cc =
D60 X D 10❑

2
1.5
= ❑
5.5 x 0.30

49
=
48

=1.0208
% Grave = 24

% Sand = 100% - (% Gravel + % fines)

= 100% - (24 + 0.381)

= 100% - 24.381

= 75.619

% Fines = % passing through the 0.075mm

= 0.381

grading envelope for G80

100

90

80

70

60
% Passing

50

40
upper 30
limit
lower 20
limit
10

0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Grain size (mm)

 grading envelope for G60
100

90

80

70

60
% Passing

50

40

upper 30
limit
20
lower
limit 10

0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Grain size (mm)

From the diagram above, it can be seen that since the material does not satisfy the
conditons for both a base material and a sub-base material. We have to stabilize the
material using stabilizing techniques such as: Surface compaction, drainage
methods, Grouting and Injection, Chemical stabilization and vibration methods.

SOIL STABILIZATION TECHNIQUE

• Surface Compaction

One of the oldest methods of soil densification is surface compaction. Construction of a new
road needs a compacted base for laying the structure. If the depth to be densified is less, the
surface compaction alone can solve the problem. The usual surface compaction devices are
rollers, tampers and rammers. All conventional rollers like smooth wheel, rubber-tyre, sheep
foot, vibratory and grid rollers can be used.

• Drainage Methods
Ground water is one of the most difficult problems in excavation work. The presence of water
increases the pore water pressure and decreases the shear strength. Further heavy inflow of water
to the excavations is liable to cause erosion or collapse of the sides of open excavations. Certain
methods are available to control the ground water and ensure a safe and economical construction
scheme. Common drainage methods are Well-point Systems, Deep- well Drainage, Vacuum

Dewatering system, Dewatering by Electro-osmosis etc

• Grouting and injection

Grouting is a process whereby stabilizers, either in the form of suspension or solution are
injected into subsurface soil or rock for one or more of the following applications:

i. Control of ground water during construction

ii. Void filling to prevent excessive settlement
iii. Strengthening adjacent foundation soils to protect them against damage during
excavation, Pile driving, etc.
iv. Soil Strengthening to reduce lateral support requirements
v. Stabilization of loose sands against Liquefaction
vi. Foundation Underpinning
vii. Reduction of machine foundation vibrations

 Chemical Stabilization

Chemical Stabilization has been widely used in the form of lime, cement, fly ash and the
combination of the above is widely used in soil stabilization. Chemical Stabilizations reduce
permeability of the soils, improve shear strength, increase bearing capacity, decrease settlement
and expedite construction. Chemical Stabilization is used for surface soils more successfully.

Mixtures of soils and chemicals are mixed either mechanically in place or by batch process.

Some of the chemicals used are Lime, Cement, and Fly Ash etc.

 Vibration Methods
Vibration methods can be effectively used for rapid densification of saturated noncohesive soils.
Vibrations and shock waves in loose deposits of such materials cause liquefaction followed by
densification accompanying the dissipation of excess pore water pressures. Some of the mostly
adopted vibration methods are blasting, Vibrating probe, Vibratory rollers, Vibro-displacement
Compaction Piles, Vibrofloatation, Heavy Tamping etc.

3.4 VERTICAL ALIGNMENT

HEIGHT OF PLANE COLLINATION METHOD (HPC)
 INTER- REDUCE ADJUSTMENT
BS SITE FORESIGHT HPC D LEVEL ADJUSTMENT R.L REMARKS CHAINAGES
0.298 100.298 100 0.000286 TBM=100
0.763 99.535 0.000286 99.535 CL 0+000
0.681 99.617 0.000286 99.617 L
0.85 99.448 0.000286 99.448 R
2.705 97.593 0.000286 97.593 CL 0+025
2.882 97.416 0.000286 97.416 L
0.175 2.764 97.709 97.534 0.000286 97.534 R
2.648 95.061 0.000572 0.000286 CL 0+050
2.702 95.009 0.000572 95.009 L
0.132 2.659 95.182 95.05 0.000572 95.051 R
2.67 92.512 0.000858 92.513 CL 0+075
2.75 92.432 0.000858 92.433 L
2.772 92.41 0.000858 92.411 R
4.781 90.401 0.000858 90.402 CL 0+100
4.849 90.333 0.000858 90.334 L
0.262 4.846 90.598 90.336 0.000858 90.337 R
2.496 88.102 0.00114 88.103 CL 0+125
2.723 87.875 0.00114 0.000572 L
2.554 88.044 0.00114 88.045 R
4.931 85.667 0.00114 85.668 CL 0+150
4.89 85.803 0.00114 85.709 L
0.139 4.889 85.848 85.709 0.00114 85.71 R
2.355 83.493 0.00143 83.494 CL 0+175
2.299 83.549 0.00143 83.36 L
2.256 83.592 0.00143 83.593 R
4.273 81.575 0.00143 81.576 CL 0+200
4.241 81.607 0.00143 81.608 L
1.699 4.2 83.347 81.648 0.00143 81.649 R
2.67 80.677 0.00172 80.678 CL 0+225
2.709 80.638 0.00172 80.639 L
2.206 80.649 0.00172 80.643 R
2.164 80.138 0.00172 81.139 CL 0+250
2.203 81.144 0.00172 81.146 L
2.107 81.24 0.00172 81.242 R
0.761 82.586 0.00172 82.589 CL 0+275
0.776 82.571 0.00172 82.573 L
1.345 0.622 84.12 82.725 0.00172 82.727 R
0.821 83.299 0.002 83.301 CL 0+300
ARITHMETIC CHECK
∑BS - ∑FS = last reduced level – first reduced level

∑BS - ∑FS= (30.495) - (30.499)

= -0.004

Last R.L – First R.L= (99.996) - (100)

= -0.004

Misclosure = computed value of RL – Known value of R.L

E = (99.996) - (100)

= -0.004

Allowable misclosure = ± 0.005√n

= ± 0.005√14
= ± 0.0187
LENGTH OF VERTICAL CURVE

L=KA

A= -8 +(3)

A =11

K= 5

Recommended K Value

40Km/h

L=11*5= 55m

L 55
= = 22.5m
2 2
 PVI elevation = 80.676m

PVC elevation= PVI elevatio +∆ H

= 80.676 + ¿)

= 82.876m

PVT elevation = PVI elevation +∆ H

55
= 80.678 +(0.03* ¿
2

= 81.503m

55
PVC station =0+200−¿
2

= 197.5m

55
PVC station =0+200−¿
2

= 197.5m

CURVE

Station Distance from Tangent elevation Vertical Offset Curve elevation =

PVC (X)m vertical offset +
PVC + P*X Y=(q-p)/2L*X2
Tangent elevation

PVC 0 + 197.5 0 82.878 0 82.878

0 + 200 2.500 82.953 -0.006 82.947

0 + 225 27.500 83.703 -0.756 82.947

0+250 52.500 84.453 -2.756 81.697

PVT 0+252.5 55 84.528 -3.025 81.503
 2
Lp
Highest point elevation = y pvc +
2( p−q)

2
24.92 x (0.042)
= 57 +
2(0.042+0.203)

= 57.35m

Lp
Location of highest, x =
p−q

24.92 x 0.042
=
0.042+0.0203

= 16.8

Chainage of highest point = PVC +16.8

= 0+112.5 + 16.8

= 0 +129.3

3.5 HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT DESIGN

GPS COORDINATES
CHAINAGE PI EASTERN(m) NORTHERN(m)
0+000 START 189850.69 26225.83
POINT
0+083.5 1 189862.87 26406.11
0+300 END 189958.36 26501.08
POINT

P 1 P 2= tan-1(∆E/∆N)

= tan-1(189862.87- 189850.69)/(26406.11-26225.83)

=tan-1(12.18/180.28)
 = 3˚51'54.43"

P 2 P 3= tan-1(∆E/∆N)

= tan-1(189958.36- 189862.87)/(26501.08-26406.11)

=tan-1(95.44/94.97)

= 45˚9'23.15"

Deflection angle = 45˚9'23.15" - 3˚51'54.43"

= 41˚17'29"

Tangent Length= R tan(θ/2)

Radius(R)= 100m

T= 100 tan (41˚17'29"/2)

T= 37.68m

PI chainage= PC chainage + T

PC chainage = PC chainage – T

PC chainage = 0 + 83.5 – 37.68

PC chainage =0 + 45.82

PT chainage = PC chainage + LC

PT chainage =0 +45.82 + θ/360*2ΠR

PT chainage = 0+45.82+ 41˚17'29"/360 * 2π100

PT chainage =0 +113.85

Chainage Distance(x) Radians(x/2R) Degree(Radians/π)*180) Chord(2Rsindx)

0 ' '
PC 0 + 45.82 0.000 0.000 0 00 00 ' 0m

0 ' '
0 + 050 4.18 0.0209 1 11 50.93 ' 4.18m

0 ' '
0 + 075 29.18 0.1459 8 21 34.04 ' 29.08m

0 ' '
0 + 100 54.18 0.2709 15 31 17.14 ' 53.52m

0 ' '
PT 0+113.85 68.03 0.34015 19 29 20.97 ' 66.73m

3.6 TRAFFIC VOLUME DETERMINATION

A classified volume count was conducted by group 6 on Thursday, 27th July 2023 on the 2-lane
Cedar Close Avenue to determine ADT of each vehicle class in each direction.
TRAFFIC COUNT FROM 8am – 9am

Vehicle Category Left Lane Right Lane

Taxis 126 25
Cars 176 38
Pickups 45 0
Small bus 75 2
Medium Trucks 10 0

TRAFFIC COUNT FROM 9am – 10am

Vehicle Category Left Lane Right Lane

Taxis 116 18
Cars 147 29
Pickups 31 3
 Small bus 49 6
Medium Trucks 6 0

Total Volume for 8am – 9am = 497veh/day

Total Volume for 9am – 10am = 405veh/day

Total volume of vehicles on left lane = 781veh/day

Total volume of vehicles on right lane = 121veh/day

Total volume of vehicles on both lanes = 902veh/day

Total volume for 24 hr period

HEF =
volume for particular week

Average total volume for week

DEF =
total volume for particular day

AADT
MEF =
ADT for particular week

Hour Hourly volume HEF 24hr period volume

8am – 9am 497 2.2 1093.40
9am – 10am 405 1.8 729
1822.40

Average total volume for week

DEF =
total volume for particular day

weekly volume
7.3 =
1822.40

Weekly volume = 1822.40 x 7.3

 = 13303.52veh

13303.52
ADT =
7

= 1900.50

AADT
MEF =
ADT for particular week

AADT
0.5 =
1900.50

AADT = 0.5 x1900.50

AADT = 950.25veh/day (approximately 950 veh/day)

DIRECTIONAL SPLIT

Number of vehicles on a lane

Directional split = x 100 %
total number of vehicles on both lanes

For Right Lane

121
Directional split = x 100 %
902

= 13.4%

For Left Lane

781
Directional split = x 100 %
902

= 86.6%

86.6% OF TOTAL AADT

86.6
x 950
100
= 822.7
TRAFFIC COMPOSITION

For taxis

Total number of taxis on the left lane= 126+116

= 242

242
Traffic composition for taxis = x 100 = 26.82%
902

For cars

Total number of cars on the left lane= 176+147

= 323

323
Traffic composition for cars = x 100 = 35.80%
902

For pickups

Total number of pickups on the left lane= 45+31

= 76

76
Traffic composition for pickups = x 100 = 8.42%
902

For small bus

Total number of small bus on the left lane= 75+49

= 124

124
Traffic composition for small bus = x 100 = 13.74%
902

For medium trucks

Total number of medium trucks on the left lane= 10+6

= 16

16
Traffic composition for medium trucks = x 100 = 1.77%
902

TOTAL TRAFFIC COMPOSITION = 26.82+35.80+8.42+13.74+1.77

= 86.6%

VECHILE EQUIVALEN TRAFFIC AADT FOR AVERAG AVERAG CUMMULA

S CLASS T FACTORS COMPOSITIO 0.866((x/86.6)*822.7 E ESAL E ESAL E ESAL FOR
(a) N ¿ DAY (a YEAR (a DESIGN
(%)(x) (b) ×b¿ × b× 365 ¿ PERIOD OF
10YRS(a
× b× 365 × fg
TAXI 0.00002 26.82 254.79 0.0051 1.8600 22.971
CARS 0.00002 35.80 304.10 0.0061 2.200 27.416
PICKUP 0.00018 8.42 79.99 0.0144 5.255 64.903
SMALL 0.012 13.74 130.53 1.5664 571.721 7060.759
BUS
MEDIUM 0.237 1.77 16.82 3.986 1455.0141 17969.424
BUS
86.6 0.025145ME

TRAFFIC GROWTH RATE DETERMINATION

Traffic growth rate using average GDP growth rate from 2017 to 2020

2021−5.36 %

2020−¿0.15%
2019−6.51 %

2018−6.20 %

2017−8.13 %

2016−3.37 %

2015−¿2.12%

5.36+0.51+6.51+6.20+ 8.13+3.37+2.12
Average==
7

=4.60% =0.046

Growth Factor For 10 years

n
(1+r ) −1
r

Where n=number of years ,r=growth rate

10
(1+0.046) −1
FG= =12.35
0.046

ESAL=0.025145473×10 6

3.7 PAVEMENT DESIGN

Pavement and materials

The curve for both the base and sub-base is ascertained by plotting the percentage
finer/passing against particle sieve size in mm. The soil type obtained failed to lie
within the envelope of both the sub-base and base, hence the soil type is not good
enough to sustain the loads that will be applied on it; hence it requires stabilization,
that is the addition of a binding agent such as lime or posted cement to reduce the
permeability and compressibility of soil mass in the earth structures and to enhance
the soil shear strength
The pavement criteria follows the overseas road. (Read note No.31, TL, UK) and
with the following considerations:

1. The pavement is to be designed for 10 years of life span.

2. The subgrade CBR value is 5 %.
The equivalent standard axle for the road is assumed to be in the range 0.025145473
6
×10

According to the key to Structural Catalogue, the Traffic classes obtained is less 0.3
i.e., T1 = 0.3-0.7 and the CBR % is given to be 5% and its corresponding subgrade
strength class is S3 i.e., S3 = 5-7

Design Process

The main processes by which the pavement was designed are;

• Determination of the suitability of soil; whether it is base or subbase

material using particle size distribution and Atterburg limit test.
• Conducting traffic count to obtain our peak hour volume and AADT.

• Estimation of traffic growth factors for the pavement design.

• Computing for the equivalent standard axil loading ( traffic loading ).

• Selecting possible pavement thicknesses from charts.

• Determining the most feasible thickness for our road.

PAVEMENT THICKNESS DETERMINATION

For 0.13 Mesa, Traffic class = T1

For 5% CBR, Subgrade strength class = S3

From road note 31, Chart 1

(Granular Road base/Surface dress)

 FROM CHART T1, S3

FROM CHART 2, T1, S3

The road is to be designed to improve mobility in the metropolis. The road being redesigned is
mostly used by taxis and cars which do very less to no damage on the road. Very little number of
vehicles which do high amount of damage use the road. The equivalent standard axil loading
calculated for is 86.60% less than the limit of T1 traffic class. Hence the two pavements
thickness can support the loading that will be imposed on it.

Considering cost, cost for constructing pavement will be static since there
would not be any alternative to choose from. Therefore, pavement from chart 1 is
selected for the road design.
3.8 DRAINAGE DESIGN
Using Cross Coordinates for Area Computation.

FIELD POINTS EASTERNS NORTHERNS

FP1 542418 637133
FP2 542714 637279
FP3 542681 637361
FP4 542596 637273
FP5 542890 637830
FP6 542992 637947
FP1 542418 637133

2Area = [(542418x637279) + ( 542714x637361) + (542681x637273) +

(542596x637830) +(542890x637947) + (542992x637133)] – [(542714x637133) +
(542681x637279) + (542596x637361) + (542890x637273) + (542992x637830) +
(542418x637947)]

1
Area = *(617208364)
2

Total Area = 308604128m2

FOR STORMWATER

Area of catchment = 308.60 km2

Runoff coefficient of vegetation = 0.25

Runoff coefficient of building = 0.55

Runoff coefficient of road = 0.80

Land use Area(km2) Runoff

coefficient
Road 0.0126 0.8
Vegetation 191.450 0.25
Building (Roofing) 117.016 0.55

Rational method

Qsw = KCIA

K = constant (0.00278)

C = rainfall coefficient

I = rainfall intensity

A= area

Average Rainfall Intensity = 1109.16mm/yr

Converting mm/yr to m/s

1109.16
1000 x 365 x 60 x 60 x 24

= 3.5171 x 10-8m/s
 A 1 C 1+ A 2 C 2+ A 3 C 3
Integrated rainfall coefficient =
A 1+ A 2+ A 3

=
( 0.0126 X 106 X 0.8 ) + ( 191.45 X 10 6 X 0.25 ) + ( 117.016 X 106 X 0.55 )
6
308.60 X 10

= 0.4491

Qsw = kCIA

Qsw = 0.00278 x 0.4491 x 3.5171 x10-8 308x106

= 0.0135m3/s

FOR WASTEWATER

Current population = 1650 persons

Per capita consumption = 75litres/cap/day

Wastewater generated (𝑄𝑤𝑤) = 80% of 𝑄𝑤𝑐

Population Growth per annum = 4.60%

Design Period = 10 years

4.60
Population per annum = x 1650
100

= 75.9

= 76 (approximately)

Population in 10 years = 76 x 10

= 760 people

Total population for design= 760 + 1650

= 2410 people
Qwc = 2410cap x 75 l/cap/day

Qwc = 180750 l/day

Converting to m3 /s

180750
Qwc =
1000 x 24 x 60 x 60

= 2.0920 x 10−3 m3 /s

Qww = 80% of Qwc

80
= x 2.0920 x 10−3
100

= 1.6736 x 10−3 m3 /s

QTOTAL=Q sw +Q ww

QT = 1.6736 x 10-m3 /s + 0.0135m3 /s

= 0.01517m3 /s

Therefore, the total discharge will be 0.01517m3/s

At most efficient section of rectangular channel

B
D=
2

Making B the subject we get

B = 2D

Area = B X D

but B = 2D

Area = 2D X D
Area = 2D2

Area
Hydraulic Radius =
Wetted perimeter

2
2D
=
B+ 2 D

but B = 2D

2
2D
=
4D

= 0.5D

Q = VA

2 1
3 2
V= R XS
n

2 1
3 2
Q= AR S
n

n = manning’s constant (0.015)

S = slope

last reduced level−first reduced level

Slope =
total height

99.996−100.00
=[ ]
300

= 1.33 x 10−5

2 1
2 3 −5 2
Q = 2 D X (0.5 D) X (1.33 x 10 )
0.015
 2 −3
X (0.63 D ¿ ¿ X 5.606 X 10 )
0.01517= 3
2 D2 ¿
0.015

2
0.01517= 2 D2 (2.300445 x 10−3 D 3 ¿ ¿ ¿ 0.015)

2
0.01517= 2 D 2 (0.153363 D 3 )

8
0.01517 0.30672 D 3
=
O.30672 0.30672

8
D 3 = 0.04946

D = 0.32

D = 0.35m(approximate)

But B = 2D

B = 2(0.35)

B = 0.70m
 CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION
The road under consideration is an access road which is to serve a purpose of 10years. The
pavement thickness was chosen from the chart 1 because of the stabilization process involved.
Since the soil sample was not able to pass through both base and sub-base curve in the particle
size distribution graph, the material is considered to be an imaginary sub-base/base material.
Thus stabilization was done to improve the engineer property of the material.
 CHAPTER FIVE

RECCOMMENDATION
In place of the culvert, the team recommend that a camber should be constructed to avoid
ponding on the roadway as well as serve as drainage system. In addition, rumble strips should be
constructed at vantage points to slow down moving vehicles speeding beyond the speed limit of
the road.

The team recommend that the engineering property of the soil sample needs to be improved by
stabilization method.

SELECTION OF THE TYPE OF TREATMENT

The selection of the type of stabilizer is based on the plasticity and particle size distribution of
the material to be treated.

Note:

• Material with low plasticity is usually treated with cement. However, reactive
silica in the form of pozzolans can be added to soil with low plasticity to make them
suitable for stabilization with lime.

• If the plasticity of the material is high, there are sufficient reactive clay minerals
which can easily be stabilized with lime. Cement is more difficult to mix intimately with
plastic materials. This type can only be mixed with cement if it is treated approximately
2% of lime.

IMPORTANCE OF STABILIZATION
 • Surface deflection is reduced

• Resistance to erosion is reduced

• Shear strength increase and hence bearing capacity is increased as well.

REFERENCE
1. AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures 1993 Edition.
2. A Guide to The Structural Design of Bitumen- Surfaced Roads in Tropical and
Sub Tropical Countries. Overseas Road Note 31, Transport and Research
Laboratoray(UK), 1993.
3. Garber, N. J., and Hoel, L.A. (1999). Traffic and Highway Engineering (4 th
editon).
Brooks/Cole, Boston.
4. Ghana Highway Authority Road Design Guide

5. Ghana Gross Domestic Product (GDP)growth rate(2026)/www.statista.com

6. Principles of pavement design,2nd edition by Yoder and M. W. Witczak, 2007
Traffic study by ACC (Associate Consultant Company), 2007

7. www.waterboards.ca.gov (runoff coefficients for rational formula )