PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT ZiroCTSB

WIDENING OF EXISTING ROAD TO 2 LANE NH STANDARDS ALONG WITH IMPROVEMENT AND REALIGNMENT FROM POTIN TO PANGIN VIA YACHULI,
ZIRO, DAPORIZO, AALONG (PACKAGE-2,

DESIGN CHAINAGE FROM KM44.350 TO KM 77.950) ON NH-13 IN ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ARUNACHAL PWD
Widening of existing road to 2 lane NH
standards along with improvement and
realignment from Potin to Pangin via
Yachuli, Ziro, Daporizo, Aalong
(Package-2, Design chainage from
Km44.350 to Km 77.950) on NH-13 in
Arunachal Pradesh on EPC mode m
Pavement Design Report
ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 1

WIDENING OF EXISTING ROAD TO 2 LANE NH STANDARDS ALONG WITH IMPROVEMENT AND REALIGNMENT FROM POTIN TO PANGIN VIA YACHULI, ZIRO, DAPORIZO, AALONG (PACKAGE-2,
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 4
2 EXISTING CONDITION OF THE ROAD.................................................................... 4
3 CLIMATIC CONDITION OF THE AREA ................................................................... 6
4 DRAINAGE CONDITION ........................................................................................... 6
5 MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION ..................................................... 7
5.1 Embankment and Subgrade Material ....................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
5.2 Aggregates for work................................................................................................ 7
5.2.1 Cement Treated Sub-Base (CTSB) and Cement Treated Base (CTB) ............... 8
5.2.2 Aggregates for Wet Mix Macadam (WMM) .... Error! Bookmark not defined.
5.2.3 Bituminous Concrete or Surface Course (BC) ................................................ 12
5.3 Cement Content .................................................................................................... 13
5.4 Lime for Pre-Treatment ........................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
6 SCOPE OF PAVEMENT DESIGN ............................................................................. 14
6.1 Methodology of Proposed Pavement Design ......................................................... 14
6.2 CBR values for the proposed highway................................................................... 14
6.3 Effective CBR value of the Subgrade .................................................................... 15
6.4 Design Traffic ....................................................................................................... 16
6.4.1 Cumulative Million Standard Axles (CMSA) ................................................. 16
7 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................. 16
7.1 Selection of a Trial Section ................................................................................... 16
7.2 Parameters for the Design ..................................................................................... 17
7.2.1 General .......................................................................................................... 17
7.2.2 Mechanical Properties of different Layers ...................................................... 17
8 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE MODELS ................................................................. 21
8.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria ...................................................................................... 21
8.2 Fatigue Cracking Performance of the Bituminous Layer ....................................... 22

8.3 Fatigue Performance Model for CTB .................................................................... 22
8.4 Cumulative Fatigue Damage Analysis ................................................................... 23
9 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 24
9.1 Calculations as per IRC 37:2018 ........................................................................... 24
9.1.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria ............................................................................... 24
9.1.2 Fatigue Performance model for Bituminous Layer ......................................... 24
9.2 Calculations Derived from IIT-PAVE software ..................................................... 24
9.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................ 25
9.4 CTSB Thickness Analysis for Construction Traffic ............................................... 29
10 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 30

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT
1 INTRODUCTION
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRT&H) through PWD AP has
awarded the construction of “ Widening of existing road to 2 lane NH standards along with
improvement and realignment from Potin to Pangin via Yachuli, Ziro, Daporizo, Aalong
(Package-2, Design chainage from Km44.350 to Km 77.950) on NH-13 in Arunachal
Pradesh on EPC mode under Arunachal Pradesh package of SARDP-NE to the executing
agency M/s Dineshchandra R Agarwal Infracon Pvt. Ltd.
The Project Highway comprises the section of National Highway – 13 commencing

from Km 44.350 (Aniya Gate) to Km 77.950 (Tamin Village) in the state of Arunachal
Pradesh to be upgraded to 2 lane standard from existing Single lane.
The Development of the Project Highway shall include design and construction as
described in this Schedule-B and in Schedule-C of the Contract agreement.
The Project Highway shall be designed and constructed in conformity with the
Specifications and Standards specified in Annex - I of Schedule-D of the contract agreement.
The EPC Contractor shall be responsible for engineering surveys, investigation and
detailed engineering designs and prepare the working drawings for all the components
relevant for the improvement and up-gradation of the Project Highway to fulfil the scope of
the project. These shall comply with design specifications and standards given in Schedule–
D. The designs for different project facilities shall follow the locations and indicative designs
given in Schedule–C and shall comply with design specifications and standards outlined in
Schedule–D.
The guidelines for design of pavement for the project stretch as per Clause 5 of
Schedule B of the contract agreement are as follows:
(i) Pavement design shall be carried out in accordance with Section 5 of IRC:37-2018.
(ii) Type of pavement: Flexible Pavement.

(iii) Design Requirements: Design requirement for the flexible pavement shall be in
accordance with the clauses of IRC: SP-73-2018, and IRC: 37-2018 or the latest version of
both.
(iv) Design Period and strategy : Flexible pavement for new pavement or for widening and
strengthening of the existing
pavement shall be designed for a minimum design period of 15 years. Stage construction
shall not be permitted.
5.3.2 Design Traffic : The pavement shall be designed for a design traffic of 20 million
standard axles (msa).
5.3.3 Subgrade Soil: The requirements for the Subgrade’s CBR specified in IRC: SP-73-
2015, IRC: 37-2012 and MoRTH (Specification of Roads and Bridges) shall be satisfied.
In this instant proposal, the pavement design has been carried out as out as per the
guidelines of of IRC 37:2018 as per the requirement of clause 5.3 of the contract agreement.
The Design Director and his team have carried out detailed surveys and
investigations to finalize the pavement design of project road in conformity with the
stipulations of IRC. This report highlights the “Pavement Design” undertaken for the project
road in greater details.
2 EXISTING CONDITION OF THE ROAD

The project road passes through district Lower Subansiri of Arunachal Pradesh. The
headquarter of the district is at Ziro which is an important place in terms of tourism and is
strategically important. The National Highway 13 (Trans Arunachal Highway) traverses
trough the state of Arunachl Pradesh and connects important places like Potin , Ziro ,
Daporizo , Passighat etc.
The Highway provides important connectivity at different locations to the state of

Assam. The highway connects to the State highway Papu-Yupia- Hoj at Hoj which inturn
provides connectivity to the State capital through NH 52A.

The commercial traffic, gain its peak from October to March mainly due to tourism.
Further, defense vehicles frequent on the road because of the strategic importance.
October onwards carrying mainly the quarry materials, coats and bamboo to
Bangladesh So the upgrading of this road to National Highway (NH) standard for the present
is quite reasonable keeping the provision for ultimate State highway standard.
The condition of the existing road is in depleted condition and the alignment is
serpentine with many geometric deficiencies. The 2-laning of the proposed road will remove
the geometric deficiencies and will provide smooth movement of traffic.
M/s Dineshchandra R Agarwal Infracon Pvt. Ltd has been awarded the contract
for the construction of the road through international competitive bidding.
Map 1: Map showing the state of Arunachal Pradesh and Project Alignment
3 CLIMATIC CONDITION OF THE AREA

The climatic condition of the district varies from place to place as well as season to
season. The climate is largely influenced by the nature of terrain depending upon altitude and
location of the place. It may broadly be divided into four seasons in a year:

1. The cold weather season is from December to February

2. March to May is the pre-monsoon season of thunderstorms
3. The southwest monsoon from June to about the middle of October
4. The second half of October to November, which constitutes the post-monsoon
or the retreating monsoon period and is a period of transition
In the foothills or low high belt area of the district, the climatic condition is moderate in
comparison to high belt areas, where during winter it is very cold and chilly, and in summer
is pleasant. December and January are generally the coldest months, and July and August are
warmest months.
Annual rainfall in the south is heavier than that in the northern areas of the district.
During the monsoon period, more than 70 percent of the rain over the southern half occurs
while in the northern portions it is about 60 percent. Variability of rainfall for the monsoon
and the year, as a whole, are relatively small. Average annual rainfall of the district
headquarters, Ziro recorded as 934.88 cm during 2019.
The relative humidity is always high throughout the year except in the winter months
being slightly less humid. In the cold season, the sky is obscured on many mornings due to
lifted fog which clears with the advance of the day generally, moderately clouded in the
period of March to May, heavily clouded to overcast in the monsoon season and clear or
slightly clouded during the post-monsoon season. Winds are generally light strong katabatic
winds down the valleys are experienced as the local effect produced by the nature of the
terrain.
4 DRAINAGE CONDITION
The project road passes through the thickly populated areas of Ziro-Hapoli. The
current drainage system in the built up area is insufficient to drain out the water from the
township to the adjacent low lying areas. Sufficient CD works and covered side drains on
both sides have been proposed to mitigate the situation. Baring the thickly populated area of
Ziro-Hapoli the alignment passes through paddy field and hilly areas where the water could
be drained out easily by providing proper CD works and open side drains.
5 MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

The top 500 mm of the prepared foundation layer immediately below the pavement,
designated as subgrade, can be made up of in-situ material, select soil, or stabilized soil

forming the foundation for the pavement. It should be well compacted to derive optimal
strength and to limit the rutting caused due to additional densification of the layer during
the service life. It shall be compacted to attain a minimum of 97 per cent of the laboratory
maximum dry density obtained corresponding to heavy compaction as per IS:2720 Part-8
[17] for Expressways, National Highways, State Highways,
The materials used in ankments, subgrades, earthen shoulders and miscellaneous
backfills shall be soil, moorum, gravel, a mixture of these or any other material approved
by the Engineer. Such materials shall be free of logs, stumps, mots, rubbish or any other
ingredient likely to deteriorate or affect the stability of the ankment subgrade.
The following materials are not suitable for subgrade construction:
 Materials from swamps, marshes and bogs
 Peat, log, stump and perishable material: any soil that, classifies as OL, OI, OH
or Pt in accordance with IS:1498
 Materials susceptible to spontaneous combustion;
 Materials in a frozen condition;
 Clay having liquid limit exceeding 70 and plasticity index exceeding 45; and
 Materials with salts resulting in leaching in the ankment.
Expansive clay exhibiting marked swell and shrinkage properties ("free swelling
index" exceeding 50 per cent when tested as per IS: 2720 - Part 40} as a fill
material.
5.1 Aggregates for work
5.1.1 Cement Treated Sub-Base (CTSB) and Cement Treated Base (CTB)
As per clause 5.7.1.i.(b) of IRC:SP:72:2007 , Cement treated soil sub-base conforming to
clause 403 of MOSRTH Specifications.
As per clause 403.2.1 of MORTH Specifications and Standards 5 th Revision , the

material used for cement treatment shall be shall be soil including sand and gravel, laterite,
.kantar, brick aggregate, crushed rock or slag or any combination of these.
For use in a sub-base course, the material shall have a grading shown in Table 400-4;
it shall have a uniformity Coefficient not less than 5, capable of producing a well closed
surface finish.

The table 404-4 of MoRTH Standard and Specification , 5th revision is shown below:
Table 2 Table 400-1 MoRTH specifications (Revision 5th)
As per clause 402.3 of MoRTH Standard and Specifications, the quantity of cement to be
added as per cent by weight of the dry soil shall be specified in the Contract. The mix design
shall be done on the basis of 7-day unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and/or durability
test under 12 cycles of wet-dry conditions. The laboratory strength values shall be at least
1.5 times the minimum field UCS value stipulated in the Contract.
5.1.2 For Base Layer: Dense Bituminous Macadam

The coarse aggregates shall consist of crushed rock, crushed gravel or other hard material
retained on the 2.36 mm sieve. They shall be clean, hard, durable, of cubical shape, free
from dust and soft or friable matter, organic or other deleterious substances. The
specification describes the design and construction procedure for Dense Bituminous
Macadam, (DBM), for use mainly, but not exclusively, in base/binder and profile
corrective courses. The work shall consist of construction in a single or multiple layers of
DBM on a previously prepared base or sub-base. The thickness of a single layer shall be 50
mm to100 mm. The aggregates shall satisfy the physical requirements specified in Table
below for dense bituminous macadam.
Where crushed gravel is proposed for use as aggregate, not less than 90% by weight of the
crushed material retained on the 4.75 mm sieve shall have at least two fractured faces.

Physical Requirement of Coarse Aggregate for DBM
Property Test Test Method Specification
Cleanliness (dust) Grain Size Analysis IS:2386 Part 1 Max 5% passing

0.075 mm Sieve
Particle Shape Flakiness and IS:2386 Part 1 Max 30%

Elongation Index
(Combined)
Strength* Los Angeles IS:2386 Part 4 Max 35%

Abrasion Value or
Aggregate Impact
Value
Max 27%
Durability Soundness Sodium IS:2386 Part 5 Max 12%

Sulphate Magnesium
Sulphate
Max 18%
Water Absorption Water Absorption IS:2386 Part 3 Max 2%
Stripping Coating and Striping IS:6241 Maximum retained

of bitumen coating 95%
Aggregate Mixture
Water Sensitivity Retained Tensile AASTHO T283 Min 80%

Strength
Fine aggregates shall consist of crushed or naturally occurring mineral material, or a the
combination of the two, passing the 2.36 mm sieve and retained on the 75 micron sieve.
These shall be clean, hard, durable, dry and free from dust, and soft or friable matter, organic
or other deleterious matter. Natural sand shall not be allowed in binder courses. However,
natural sand upto 50 percent of the fine aggregate may be allowed in base courses. The fine
aggregate shall have a sand equivalent value of not less than 50 when tested in accordance he

with the requirement of IS:2720 (Part 37). The plasticity index of the fraction passing the in
0.425 mm sieve shall not exceed 4, when tested in accordance with IS:2720 (Part 5). Filter
shall consist of finely divided mineral matter such as rock dust, hydrated lime or cement
approved by the Engineer. The filler shall be graded within the limits indicated in Table 500-
9.
The filler shall be free from organic impurities and have a plasticity Index not greater than 4.
The Plasticity Index requirement shall not apply if filler is cement or lime. Where the
aggregates fail to meet the requirements of the water sensitivity test in Table 500-8, then 2
percent by total weight of aggregate, of hydrated lime shall be used and percentage of fine
aggregate reduced accordingly. When tested in accordance with IS:2386 Part 1 (wet sieving
method), the:l combined grading of the coarse and fine aggregates and filler for the particular
mixture shall 3 fall within the limits given in Table 500-10 for grading 1 or 2 as specified in
the Contract. To avoid gap grading, the combined aggregate gradation shall not vary from the
lower limit on one sieve to higher limit on the adjacent sieve.

5.1.3 Bituminous Concrete or Surface Course (BC)

The aggregates shall satisfy the physical requirements specified in Table below for
Bituminous Concrete.
Property Test Test Method Specification
Cleanliness (dust) Grain Size Analysis IS:2386 Part 1 Max 5% passing

0.075 mm Sieve
Particle Shape Flakiness and IS:2386 Part 1 Max 30%

Elongation Index
(Combined)

Strength* Los Angeles IS:2386 Part 4 Max 30%

Abrasion Value or
Max 24%
Aggregate Impact
Value
Durability Soundness Sodium IS:2386 Part 5 Max 12%

Sulphate Magnesium
Max 18%
Sulphate
Water Absorption Water Absorption IS:2386 Part 3 Max 2%
Stripping Coating and Striping IS:6241 Maximum retained

of bitumen coating 95%
Aggregate Mixture
Water Sensitivity** Retained Tensile AASTHO T283 Min 80%

Strength
Polishing Polished Stone Value BS: 812 part 114 Min 55
Table 1Physical Requirement of Coarse Aggregate for BC
* Aggregate may satisfy requirements of either of these two tests
**The Water Sensitivity test is only required if the minimum retained Coating in the stripping
test is less than 95%
5.2 Cement Content

Cement for cement stabilisation shall comply with the requirements of IS: 269. 455 OR 1489.
The quantity of cement to be added as per cent by weight of the dry soil shall be specified in
the Contract. Also if lime is used as pre-treatment for highly clayey soils, the quantity as per
cent by weight of dry soil shall be specified in the Contract. The mix design shall be done on
the basis of 7-day unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and/or durability test under 12
cycles of wet-dry conditions. The laboratory strength values shall be at least 1.5 times the
minimum field UCS value stipulated in the Contract.

6 SCOPE OF PAVEMENT DESIGN

(i) As per clause 5.1 of Schedule B, Pavement design shall be carried out in accordance
with the IRC:37-2018.
(ii) As per clause 5.2 of Schedule B, Type of pavement: Flexible Pavement will be
designed in accordance with the IRC:37-2018.
(iii) As per clause 5.3 of Schedule B, Design Requirements: Design requirement for the
flexible pavement shall be in accordance with section 5 of the IRC: SP-73-2015, and the IRC:
37-2018 or the latest version of both.
(iv) As per clause 5.3.1 of Schedule B, Design Period and strategy : Flexible pavement for
new pavement or for widening and strengthening of the existing pavement shall be designed
for a minimum design period of 15 years. Stage construction shall not be permitted.
(v) As per clause 5.3.2 of Schedule B, The design traffic specified in the IRC: SP-73-2015
Section 5.4.1 (i) shall be applied. IRC SP:73 2015 clause 5.4.1(i) specifies a minimum traffic
intensity of 20 msa.
(vi) As per clause 5.3.3 of Schedule B, The requirements for the Subgrade’s CBR specified in
IRC: SP-73-2015, IRC: 37-2018 and MoRTH (Specification of Roads and Bridges) shall be
satisfied.
6.1 Methodology of Proposed Pavement Design

The design of flexible pavement for widening of existing carriageway has been carried out in
accordance with IRC-37:2018 (Tentative guidelines for the design of Flexible Pavements).
The detailed methodology is given in the following sections and the summary of the proposed
design is given below.
The design shall involve consideration of the following input variables:
 Design Traffic & Axle load spectrum

 Effective CBR of subgrade
6.2 CBR values for the proposed highway

Soil samples are collected along the proposed highway alignment and tested in the laboratory
for CBR value. Chainage wise the CBR value are given below.

Table 2 CBR values of Proposed Highway
Sample No. Chainage CBR

1 44+500 10.83
2 47+000 11.42
3 51+500 14.16
4 55+000 13.83
5 58+500 13.29
6 60+500 11.70
7 64+500 10.71
8 63+000 11.86
9 66+150 9.8
10 69+380 9.5
11 71+500 11.86
6.3 Effective CBR value of the Subgrade

The CBR values of the subgrade soil vary along highway alignment even on a homogeneous
section. 90th percentile CBR is recommended in the guidelines. Now we have plotted
between percentages of values greater than equal and the CBR value as follows
Figure 6-A Graph for determination of CBR of subgrade
From the Above Graph The effective 90 percentile CBR is calculated as = 9.88 %. Therefore,
the CBR of the subgrade= 8 %. (As per Schedule B)

6.4 Design Traffic

The traffic loading in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles for the given period
has been computed using the following relationship:
Where,
N = Cumulative number of standard axles to be catered for in the design in terms of msa.
A = Initial traffic in the year of completion of construction in terms of the number of

Commercial Vehicles per Day (CVPD).
D = Lane distribution factor
F = Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF).
n = Design life in years.
r = Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles in decimal (e.g., for 5 per cent annual
growth rate, r = 0.05) as per IRC 37-2018, clause no. 4.2.2.
6.4.1 Cumulative Million Standard Axles (CMSA)

Since commercial traffic was found to be less during our traffic survey, data from IRC SP 73
as schedule D of contract agreement is referred with as 20 MSA for design of bituminous
layer and of granular layer.
7 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS
7.1 Selection of a Trial Section

A trial section satisfying the CBR Design and Design Traffic has been proposed for the
pavement design with Tensar Triaxial Geogrid at the bottom of the CTSB layer to
improve the tensile strength of both CTB and CTSB layers as per IRC 37:2018-
Layers Thickness
BC 50
SAMI 50
CTB 100

CTSB 200
TX 160 Geogrid laid over subgrade
7.2 Parameters for the Design
7.2.1 General
For the given traffic volume, which is expected in the design life, there can be large number
of combinations for the pavement depending on the availability of materials. A strong
subgrade and a strong base along with fatigue and rut resistant bituminous are very important
for a good performing pavement.
With every load repetition, flexible pavements are subjected to compression/tension at

different layers. Fatigue and rutting, induced by traffic repetitions, are generally the main
modes of pavement failures. The tensile strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer, and the
compressive strain on the subgrade are generally considered to be indicative parameters for
fatigue and rutting failures respectively. The pavement crust is to be such that the tensile
strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer and compressive strain on the top of subgrade are
to be less than the allowable strains. In case of cement treated base/sub base construction, the
tensile stress at the bottom of cement treated layer is to be such that, the cumulative fatigue
damage is less than 1.
Allowable strains for the expected traffic are calculated using the fatigue and rutting models
given IRC 37:2018 (Equation 6.1 to 6.5). With the assumed pavement crust, the strains at
critical locations are calculated using IITPAVE software. The adequacy of the design is
checked by comparing these strains with allowable strains as predicted by the fatigue and
rutting models. A satisfactory pavement design is achieved through iterative process by
varying layer thickness/ pavement layer materials.
The various parameters governing the design are given below.
7.2.2 Mechanical Properties of different Layers

Cement Treated Sub-Base (CTSB):
The elastic modulus (E) of the CTSB material may be estimated from the unconfined
compressive strength (UCS) of the material. The cementitious sub-base (CTSB) should have

a 7-day UCS of1.5 to 3.0 MPa as per IRC:SP:89. Third point loading test flexural modulus
ECGSB of 28-daycured CTSB material can be estimated using equation 7.2 of IRC-37:2018.
ECTSB = 1000 x UCS

ECTSB = Elastic Modulus of CTSB
UCS = Unconfined Compressive Strength of a 7-days cured CTSB Cube
It should be maintained that the laboratory strength should be 1.5 times the design CTSB
strength in field. For atypical cement treated granular sub-base materials, the ECGSB can
vary from 2000 to 6000 MPa. Since the sub-base acts as a platform for the construction
vehicles carrying 30 to 35 tonnes of construction material, low strength cemented sub-base
would crack under the heavy construction traffic and a design value of 600 MPa is
recommended for the analysis and design of pavements with CTSB layers. The poisson value
of the CTSB layer should be considered to be 0.25.
CTB
the thickness of cement treated bases shall not be less than 100 mm. The procedure to be
followed for the estimation of the thickness of the CTB layer required to cater to the
construction traffic has been illustrated in Annex II. The elastic modulus of cementitious
bases depends upon the quality of materials. Low grade aggregates such as moorum and
kankar may give lower modulus at lower cement contents. Fine grained soil may require
larger quantity of cementitious additive for higher strength and may develop wider cracks
upon curing. Equation 7.2 of IRC 37:2018 may be used for estimating the elastic modulus of
ECTB from the 28-day unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of CTB material also.
Poisson’s ratio value of CTB material may be taken as 0.25. Strength of cementitious layers
keeps on rising with time and an elastic modulus of 5000 MPa may be considered for analysis
of pavements with CTB layers having 7/28 day unconfined compression strength values
ranging between 4.5 to 7 MPa. While the conventional cement treated layer should attain the
above strength in 7 days, lime and lime-flyash stabilised granular materials and soils should
achieve the strength in 28 days since the strength gain in such materials is slow (IRC:SP:89).
SAMI
In case of pavements with CTB, a crack relief layer, provided between the bituminous layer
and the cementitious base, delays the reflection of crack from the CTB layer in to the

bituminous layer. The crack relief layer may consist of dense graded crushed aggregates of
100 mm thickness conforming to MORTH [23] specifications for wet mix macadam (WMM)
or the Stress Absorbing Membrane Interlayer (SAMI) of elastomeric modified binder applied
at the rate of 10 – 12 kg / 10 m2 covered with 0.1 m3 of 11.2 mm aggregates. For the
pavement analysis, the SAMI layer is not considered as a structural layer, i.e., it shall not be
included in the pavement composition for pavement analysis.
BC Layer
According to IRC-37:2018, for expressways and national highways, even if the design traffic
is 20 MSA or less, VG40 or modified bitumen shall be used for surface course and VG40
bitumen shall be used for the DBM. In view of the overlap in the viscosity ranges specified in
IS:73 for VG30 and VG40 bitumen, it is recommended that the VG40 bitumen used in the
surface, binder and base bituminous courses shall have a minimum viscosity of 3600 Poise at
600 C temperature to safeguard against rutting. The design of pavement shall be carried out
based on the actual values obtained with field designed DBM/BM mix subject to the
maximum values indicated in Table 9.2 for the selected mix (DBM/BM mixes with selected
unmodified binder) for an average annual pavement temperature of 35 0C. For the climatic
conditions prevailing in the plains of India, the Average Annual Pavement Temperature is
expected to be close to 20 ‘C. Volume of air voids and Bitumen Content is considered to be 3
and 11.5 percent respectively.
Tensar TX 160 Geogrid
MoRTH through Indian Roads Congress has recently published “Guidelines for use of
Geosynthetics in road pavements and associated works” IRC: SP:59-2019. The code provided
guidelines for use of geogrid for pavement stabilization and optimization by considering the
enhancement of performance caused due to the lateral restraint provided by the geogrid.
Use of geogrids is a well-researched and proven solution for stabilizing & optimising the
pavements. Majority of studies indicate appreciable improvement in pavement performance
due to use of geogrid in pavement. The development of the interlock at the soil – grid
interface restricts the movement of soil particles (as shown in fig 1), this stabilisation effects
helps increases the stiffness of the unbound layers thus improves the modulus of layer. This
has been well established through extensive research and full-scale trafficking trials done
across the world.

IRC: SP-59-2019 acknowledges this and provides various alternative design methods for
flexible pavement design using geogrids in Chapter 3. The design methods proposed are: 1.
Modified AASHTO design method following Layer Coefficient Ratio (LCR) (Clause 3.1.2.2)
2. Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Design (MEPD) method following Modulus
Improvement Factor (MIF) for geogrid reinforced flexible pavements (Clause 3.1.3)
Based on the design criteria and parameters mentioned in the Design Brief, following section
using Tensar TX geogrid to form MSL is proposed. The design is carried out using the
Modulus Improvement Factor (MIF) Method as given in IRC SP 59 – 2019 (as suggested in
IRC 37:2018) Pavement Life has been calculated with 90% reliability and corresponding
Transfer functions given in IRC 37. –
 Tensar TX geogrid is proposed at the interface of CTSB & CTB layer.

 Incorporation of TX geogrid at the interface will lead to stabilisation of the bound
layer, by forming a flexurally stiff layer it will further allow for optimisation.
 The stabilised and optimised pavement design is carried out by considering the
enhanced modulus of the CTSB layer due to inclusion of TX geogrid using the
Modulus Improvement Factor (MIF).
 The Enhanced modulus is calculated by multiplying MIF to the modulus of the non-
stabilised CTSB layer.
 The MIF is considered to be 2.0
The mechanical properties of all the layers are summarized below:
Design Elastic Modulus of CTSB (i) 600 Mpa

Enhanced Elastic Modulus of CTSB (i)*MIF 1200 Mpa

Design Elastic Modulus of CTB 5000 Mpa

Poisson’s Ratio for CTB 0.25
Poisson’s Ratio for CTSB 0.25
Type of Binder for BC VG 40
Elastic Modulus for Binder at 150C 6000 Mpa (20’C as per Table 9.2 of IRC
37:2018)
Volume of Air Void at BC 3 percent
Volume of Bitumen Content at BC 11.5 percent
Poisson’s Ratio of Bituminous Layer 0.35
Figure 7-A Design Mechanical Properties of the Pavement Layers
8 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE MODELS
8.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria

As per equation 3.2, IRC: 37-2018 rut life in number of standard axles is given below:
Where,
NR = Subgrade Rutting Life (Cumulative number of standard Axles of 80 KN load that can
be served by the pavement before a rutting depth of 20 mm or more occurs.)
ϵv = Vertical Compressive strain at the top of the subgrade calculated using linear elastic
layered theory by applying the standard axle load at the selected surface.
IITPAVE software is used in these guidelines for the analysis of pavements. For the
computation of stresses, strains and defections in the pavement, thicknesses and elastic
properties (elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio) of different layers are the main inputs. For
the calculation of vertical compressive strain on top of the subgrade, horizontal tensile strain
at the bottom of the bottom bituminous layer and the horizontal tensile strain at the bottom of
cement treated base (CTB) layer, the analysis is done for a standard axle load of 80 kN
(single axle with dual wheels). Only one set of dual wheels, each wheel carrying 20 kN load
with the centre to centre spacing of 310 mm between the two wheels, applied at the pavement
surface shall be considered for the analysis. The shape of the contact area of the tyre is

assumed in the analysis to be circular. The uniform vertical contact stress shall be considered
as 0.56 MPa.
8.2 Fatigue Cracking Performance of the Bituminous Layer

As per equation 3.4, IRC:37-2018 fatigue life in number of standard axles is given below:
Where,
C= 10M, M= 4.84*(Vbe/(Va+Vbe) – 0.69)

Vbe = Percentage of bitumen content
Va = Percentage of Air Void in BC
MRm = Elastic Modulus of Bituminous Layer at 350C
Nf = Fatigue Life of Bituminous Layer
ϵt = Tensile strain at the bottom of Bituminous Layer
The factor ‘C’ is an adjustment factor used to account for the effect of variation in the mix
volumetric parameters (effective binder volume and air void content) on the fatigue life of
bituminous mixes [9] and was incorporated in the fatigue models to integrate the mix design
considerations in the fatigue performance model.
8.3 Fatigue Performance Model for CTB

In the case of pavements with CTB layer, fatigue performance check for the CTB layer
should be carried out as per equation 3.5 (based on cumulative standard axle load repetitions
estimated using vehicle damage factors), and as per equations 3.6 and 3.7 (cumulative fatigue
damage analysis) using axle load spectrum data. It may be noted that ‘cement treated’ refers
to stabilization by different types of cementitious materials such as cement, lime, fly-ash, or a
combination thereof. Equation 3.5 of IRC-37:2018 is based on the Australian experience
whereas equation 3.6 is as per the recommendations of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement
Design Guide. Pavement analysis shall be carried out using IITPAVE with a contact stress of
0.8 MPa on the pavement surface to determine the tensile strain (ϵt) value at the bottom of the

CTB layer. The number of standard axle loads derived from equation 3.5 by substituting the
computed tensile strain value along with other inputs shall be less than the design traffic.
Where,
N = Life of CTB layer in terms of Million Standard Axles (MSA)

RF = Reliability factor
ϵT = Tensile strain at the bottom of CTB layer

E = Elastic Modulus of CTB layer
8.4 Cumulative Fatigue Damage Analysis

The CTB layer is subjected to cumulative fatigue damage by the application of axle loads of
different categories and different magnitudes applied over the design life period. The fatigue
life Nfi of the CTB material when subjected to a specific number of applications (ni) of axle
load of class ‘i’ during the design period, is given by equation 3.6 of IRC 37:2018. Details of
different types of axles, axle load spectrum, repetitions of each load group expected during
the design life period, shall be obtained from the analysis of the axle load survey data.
Where,
Nfi = Fatigue Life of CTB material which is maximum repetitions of axle load of class “i”
CTB can sustain
t= Tensile stress at the bottom of the CTB layer due to a given axle load class
Mrup = Modulus of Flexural strength of CTB material

The cumulative fatigue damage (CFD) caused by different repetitions of axle loads of
different categories and different magnitudes expected to be applied on the pavement during
its design period is estimated using equation 3.7.
ni = Expected (during the life time of the pavement) repetitions for axle load class i.
CFD should be less than 1 for the design to be acceptable.
9 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
9.1 Calculations as per IRC 37:2018
9.1.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria

Permissible vertical strain at subgrade = 454.95xE-06
9.1.2 Fatigue Performance model for Bituminous Layer

Permissible tensile strain at the bottom of bituminous layer = 222.9xE-06
9.1.3 Fatigue Performance Model for CTB

Permissible Tensile Strain at the bottom of CTB layer = 76.66xE-06
9.2 Calculations Derived from IIT-PAVE software
9.2.1 Output Page of IIT Pave for Subgrade Rutting and Bituminous Fatigue is
shown below:

9.2.2 Output Page of IIT Pave for CTB fatigue:
9.3 Analysis
Performance Criterion Permissible Maximum Design Check
Vertical Strain at 454.95E-06 297.3E-06 SAFE
subgrade
Tensile Strain at 222.9E-06 23.88E-06 SAFE
Bituminous Layer
Tensile strain at CTB 76.66E-06 70.77E-06 SAFE

10 Cumulative Fatigue Analysis
Tensile Stress
Single Axle Wheel Load Repititions at the bottom Fatigue Life
Axle Load Class Stress Ratio ni/Ni
Load (Wi) (ni) of CTB (Ni)
Sigma(t)
185-195 190 47500 60000 0.62 0.442857143 2.59E+06 0.02
175-185 180 45000 80000 0.6 0.43 3.86E+06 0.02
165-175 170 42500 89910 0.56 0.4 8.58E+06 0.01

155-165 160 40000 76691 0.53 0.38 1.56E+07 0.00
145-155 150 37500 87642 0.5 0.357142857 2.84E+07 0.00
135-145 140 35000 69864 0.47 0.34 5.16E+07 0.00
125-135 130 32500 75038 0.44 0.314285714 9.38E+07 0.00
115-125 120 30000 65537 0.42 0.30 1.40E+08 0.00
105-115 110 27500 77020 0.38 0.271428571 3.10E+08 0.00
95-105 100 25000 79241 0.35 0.25 5.64E+08 0.00
85-95 90 22500 75442 0.32 0.228571429 1.03E+09 0.00
<85 85 21250 65716 0.29 0.21 1.87E+09 0.00
Cumulative Fatigue Damage in CTB due to Single Axles = 0.07

Tandem Axle Dual Wheel Axle Load Spectrum

Tensile
Repititions
Stress at
Tandem wrt single
the Stress Fatigue
Axle Load Class Axle Wheel Load (Wi) Repititions axle (ni) ni/Ni
bottom Ratio Life (Ni)
Load (Tandem
of CTB
Axles x 2)
Sigma(t)
390-410 400 50000 11074 22148 0.65 0.46 1.43E+06 0.02
370-390 380 47500 13491 26982 0.62 0.44 2.59E+06 0.01
350-370 360 45000 11660 23320 0.6 0.43 3.86E+06 0.01
330-350 340 42500 14305 28610 0.56 0.40 8.58E+06 0.00
310-330 320 40000 12327 24654 0.53 0.38 1.56E+07 0.00
290-310 300 37500 11335 22670 0.5 0.36 2.84E+07 0.00
270-290 280 35000 12687 25374 0.47 0.34 5.16E+07 0.00
250-270 260 32500 10094 20188 0.44 0.31 9.38E+07 0.00
230-250 240 30000 14498 28996 0.42 0.30 1.40E+08 0.00
210-230 220 27500 10720 21440 0.38 0.27 3.10E+08 0.00
190-210 200 25000 14799 29598 0.35 0.25 5.64E+08 0.00
170-190 180 22500 10039 20078 0.32 0.23 1.03E+09 0.00
<170 170 21250 10613 21226 0.29 0.21 1.87E+09 0.00
Cumulative Fatigue Damage in Axle due to Tandem Axles= 0.04

Tridem Axle Dual Wheel Axle Load Spectrum

Tensile
Repititions
Stress at
wrt single
the Stress Fatigue
Axle Load Class Tridem Axle Load Wheel Load (Wi) Repititions axle (ni) ni/Ni
bottom Ratio Life (Ni)
(Tandem
of CTB
Axles x 3)
Sigma(t)
585-615 600 50000 6124 18372 0.65 0.46 1.43E+06 0.01
555-585 570 47500 7008 21024 0.62 0.44 2.59E+06 0.01
525-555 540 45000 6914 20742 0.6 0.43 3.86E+06 0.01
495-525 510 42500 7558 22674 0.56 0.40 8.58E+06 0.00
465-495 480 40000 6066 18198 0.53 0.38 1.56E+07 0.00
435-465 450 37500 6525 19575 0.5 0.36 2.84E+07 0.00
405-435 420 35000 6168 18504 0.47 0.34 5.16E+07 0.00
375-405 390 32500 7149 21447 0.44 0.31 9.38E+07 0.00
345-375 360 30000 6415 19245 0.42 0.30 1.40E+08 0.00
315-345 330 27500 7790 23370 0.38 0.27 3.10E+08 0.00
285-315 300 25000 7891 23673 0.35 0.25 5.64E+08 0.00
255-285 270 22500 7655 22965 0.32 0.23 1.03E+09 0.00
<255 255 21250 7892 23676 0.29 0.21 1.87E+09 0.00
Cumulative Fatigue Damage in CTB due to Tridem Axles = 0.03
Total Cumulative Damage in CTB due to various Axles = 0.14
So the CTB thickness is safe from cumulative fatigue cracking.

WIDENING OF EXISTING ROAD TO 2 LANE NH STANDARDS ALONG WITH IMPROVEMENT AND REALIGNMENT FROM POTIN TO PANGIN VIA YACHULI, ZIRO, DAPORIZO, AALONG
(PACKAGE-2, DESIGN CHAINAGE FROM KM44.350 TO KM 77.950) ON NH-13 IN ARUNACHAL PRADESH
10.1 CTSB Thickness Analysis for Construction Traffic

Design CBR for Subgrade = 8 pc
Resilient Modulus of Subgrade = 66.60 (Using Equation 6.2 of IRC 37:2018)
Thickness of CTSB = 200mm
Number of dumpers required for laying CTB in a single stretch of 2 km = 80
Assuming that the load near the rear tandem axle of the dumper is 240 KN and that of the
front axle is 80 KN
The VDF of the dumper = 12.41
Total Number of Standard Axles = 2482
Design construction traffic to be considered is the traffic thus estimates of 10,000

standard axles of whichever is more.
Therefore, allowable subgrade strain for 10000 standard axles of Dumper = 2.43E-03
From IIT Pave,
Maximum vertical strain at subgrade = 1.3E-03
Therefore, thickness of CTSB is sufficient.
The cemented sub-base shall be cured for a minimum of three days before the construction of
the next layer. In case sufficient strength of cementitious sub-base is not achieved as per the
requirement of IRC SP:89-2010 in 3 days of curing, 7 days curing shall be done for sub-base
before the construction of the upper layer can be started.

WIDENING OF EXISTING ROAD TO 2 LANE NH STANDARDS ALONG WITH IMPROVEMENT AND REALIGNMENT FROM POTIN TO PANGIN VIA YACHULI, ZIRO, DAPORIZO, AALONG
(PACKAGE-2, DESIGN CHAINAGE FROM KM44.350 TO KM 77.950) ON NH-13 IN ARUNACHAL PRADESH
11 CONCLUSION
The trial section selected is good for construction
Layers Thickness
BC 50
SAMI 50
CTB 100
CTSB 200
TENSAR TriAX Geogrid:160
Fig 5: Typical Cross Section of Pavement Proposed

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT ZiroCTSB

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT ZiroCTSB

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT ZiroCTSB

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WIDENING OF EXISTING ROAD TO 2 LANE NH STANDARDS ALONG WITH IMPROVEMENT AND REALIGNMENT FROM POTIN TO PANGIN VIA YACHULI,

ZIRO, DAPORIZO, AALONG (PACKAGE-2,

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 1

2 EXISTING CONDITION OF THE ROAD.................................................................... 4

3 CLIMATIC CONDITION OF THE AREA ................................................................... 6

4 DRAINAGE CONDITION ........................................................................................... 6

5 MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION ..................................................... 7

5.2 Aggregates for work................................................................................................ 7

5.2.3 Bituminous Concrete or Surface Course (BC) ................................................ 12

5.3 Cement Content .................................................................................................... 13

5.4 Lime for Pre-Treatment ........................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

6 SCOPE OF PAVEMENT DESIGN ............................................................................. 14

6.1 Methodology of Proposed Pavement Design ......................................................... 14

6.2 CBR values for the proposed highway................................................................... 14

6.3 Effective CBR value of the Subgrade .................................................................... 15

6.4 Design Traffic ....................................................................................................... 16

6.4.1 Cumulative Million Standard Axles (CMSA) ................................................. 16

7 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................. 16

7.1 Selection of a Trial Section ................................................................................... 16

7.2 Parameters for the Design ..................................................................................... 17

7.2.1 General .......................................................................................................... 17

7.2.2 Mechanical Properties of different Layers ...................................................... 17

8 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE MODELS ................................................................. 21

8.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria ...................................................................................... 21

8.2 Fatigue Cracking Performance of the Bituminous Layer ....................................... 22

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 2

8.3 Fatigue Performance Model for CTB .................................................................... 22

8.4 Cumulative Fatigue Damage Analysis ................................................................... 23

9 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 24

9.1 Calculations as per IRC 37:2018 ........................................................................... 24

9.1.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria ............................................................................... 24

9.1.2 Fatigue Performance model for Bituminous Layer ......................................... 24

9.2 Calculations Derived from IIT-PAVE software ..................................................... 24

9.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................ 25

9.4 CTSB Thickness Analysis for Construction Traffic ............................................... 29

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 3

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT

The Project Highway comprises the section of National Highway – 13 commencing

(ii) Type of pavement: Flexible Pavement.

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 4

shall not be permitted.

standard axles (msa).

2 EXISTING CONDITION OF THE ROAD

The Highway provides important connectivity at different locations to the state of

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 5

3 CLIMATIC CONDITION OF THE AREA

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 6

1. The cold weather season is from December to February

5 MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 7

5.1 Aggregates for work

As per clause 403.2.1 of MORTH Specifications and Standards 5 th Revision , the

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 8

Table 2 Table 400-1 MoRTH specifications (Revision 5th)

5.1.2 For Base Layer: Dense Bituminous Macadam

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 9

Physical Requirement of Coarse Aggregate for DBM

Property Test Test Method Specification