AGPT10-09 Guide To Pavement Technology Part 10 Subsurface Drainage

Guide to Guide to Pavement Technology Part 10:
Subsurface Drainage
Sydney 2009
Guide to Pavement Technology Part 10: Subsurface Drainage
Publisher
First edition project manager: Allan Jones
Austroads Ltd.
Level 9, 287 Elizabeth Street
First edition prepared by: Ryan de Carteret and Lee Comport Sydney NSW 2000 Australia
Phone: +61 2 8265 3300
Abstract
austroads@austroads.com.au
The target audience for the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology www.austroads.com.au
includes all those involved with the management of roads, including industry,
and students seeking to learn more about the fundamental concepts, About Austroads
principles, issues and procedures associated with pavement technology.
Austroads is the peak organisation of Australasian
Part 10: Subsurface Drainage – provides guidance on: road transport and traffic agencies.
• types of pavement subsurface drainage systems and procedures to design Austroads’ purpose is to support our member
these systems organisations to deliver an improved Australasian
• materials used for pavement subsurface drainage road transport network. To succeed in this task, we
undertake leading-edge road and transport
• construction and maintenance considerations for pavement subsurface research which underpins our input to policy
drainage systems. development and published guidance on the
design, construction and management of the road
network and its associated infrastructure.
Keywords Austroads provides a collective approach that
subsurface, pavement, design, drainage, pipes, filters delivers value for money, encourages shared
knowledge and drives consistency for road users.
Austroads is governed by a Board consisting of
Edition 1.1 published August 2018 senior executive representatives from each of its
eleven member organisations:
• Corrections to: Figure 5.3; table cross references in Section 5.6.2 Design of
Granular Filters; and Manning’s formula in Section 5.7.2 Pipe slope and • Roads and Maritime Services New South Wales
size.
• Roads Corporation Victoria
• Formatting updated.
• Queensland Department of Transport and Main
Edition 1 published May 2009 Roads
• Main Roads Western Australia
ISBN 978-1-921551-38-3 Pages 59 • Department of Planning, Transport and
Infrastructure South Australia
Austroads Project No. TP1565
• Department of State Growth Tasmania
Austroads Publication No. AGPT10-09
• Department of Infrastructure, Planning and
Logistics Northern Territory
© Austroads Ltd 2009 • Transport Canberra and City Services
Directorate, Australian Capital Territory
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without • Australian Government Department of
the prior written permission of Austroads. Infrastructure and Regional Development
• Australian Local Government Association
• New Zealand Transport Agency.
This Guide is produced by Austroads as a general guide. Its application is discretionary. Road authorities may vary their practice
according to local circumstances and policies. Austroads believes this publication to be correct at the time of printing and does not
accept responsibility for any consequences arising from the use of information herein. Readers should rely on their own skill and
judgement to apply information to particular issues.
Contents
1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Guide to Pavement Technology ............................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Scope of Part 10 of the Guide to Pavement Technology ......................................................................... 2
2. Moisture Ingress and Drainage Systems ............................................................................................. 3

2.1 General ..................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Sources of Moisture Ingress ..................................................................................................................... 3
2.2.1 Surface ....................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.2 Shoulder/Verge ........................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.3 Subgrade .................................................................................................................................... 5
2.3 Types of Drainage Systems ..................................................................................................................... 5
2.3.1 Surface Drainage ........................................................................................................................ 5
2.3.2 Subsurface Drainage .................................................................................................................. 6
2.3.3 Drainage Blankets ...................................................................................................................... 7
3. Types and Uses of Subsurface Pavement Drains............................................................................... 8

3.1 Types of Subsurface Pavement Drains .................................................................................................... 8
3.2 Selection of Pavement Drain Type and Filter Type................................................................................ 10
3.3 Location of Pavement Drains ................................................................................................................. 12
3.3.1 Freeways .................................................................................................................................. 12
3.3.2 Urban Arterials .......................................................................................................................... 12
3.4 Pavement Drain Cross Sections ............................................................................................................ 13
3.5 Pavement Drains below Kerb and Channel ........................................................................................... 14
3.6 Special Purpose Pavement Drainage Systems ..................................................................................... 14
3.6.1 Pavement Widenings ................................................................................................................ 14
3.6.2 Lowering a Water Table ........................................................................................................... 15
3.6.3 Expansive Subgrades ............................................................................................................... 16
3.6.4 Other Special Purpose Drainage Systems ............................................................................... 16
4. Site Investigation and Assessment for Subsurface Drainage .........................................................17

4.1 General ................................................................................................................................................... 17
4.2 Scope of Investigation ............................................................................................................................ 17
4.3 Large Scale Investigations ..................................................................................................................... 17
4.3.1 General ..................................................................................................................................... 17
4.3.2 Reconnaissance Studies .......................................................................................................... 18
4.3.3 Quantitative Subsurface Investigations .................................................................................... 18
5. Design of Subsurface pavement drains ............................................................................................. 20

5.1 General ................................................................................................................................................... 20
5.2 Design Procedure ................................................................................................................................... 20
5.3 Estimating Inflow .................................................................................................................................... 22
5.4 Estimating Seepage through Pavements ............................................................................................... 23
5.4.1 General ..................................................................................................................................... 23
5.4.2 Determining the Required Permeability of Pavement or Drainage Layers .............................. 24
5.4.3 Determining the Actual Permeability of Pavement or Drainage Layers ................................... 24
5.5 Determining Required Filter Permeability and Width of Trench ............................................................. 25
5.6 Compatibility of Filters with Soils and Pipes ........................................................................................... 26
5.6.1 General ..................................................................................................................................... 26
5.6.2 Design of Granular Filters ......................................................................................................... 27
5.6.3 Geotextile Filter Design ............................................................................................................ 34
5.7 Selection of Pipe Size and Grade .......................................................................................................... 41
5.7.1 Determining the Flow into the Pipe .......................................................................................... 41
5.7.2 Pipe Size and Slope ................................................................................................................. 41
5.7.3 Pipe Permeability ...................................................................................................................... 42
Austroads 2009 | page i

5.7.4 Pipe Stiffness and Strength ...................................................................................................... 42

5.7.5 Prefabricated Geocomposite Fin Drains .................................................................................. 43
6. Construction and Maintenance Considerations ............................................................................... 45

6.1 General ................................................................................................................................................... 45
6.2 Design of Inlets and Outlets ................................................................................................................... 45
6.2.1 Inlets ......................................................................................................................................... 45
6.2.2 Outlets ...................................................................................................................................... 45
6.3 Access Points ......................................................................................................................................... 45
6.4 Markers ................................................................................................................................................... 45
References ...................................................................................................................................................... 47
Appendix A Estimation of Permeability from Grading ............................................................................. 49
Appendix B Pavement Drain Design Example .......................................................................................... 52
Appendix C Granular filter Design example .............................................................................................. 56
Tables
Table 3.1: Example guide to selection of subsurface drain type and filter type.......................................10
Figures
Figure 2.1: Sources of moisture .................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 2.2: Infiltration of water via the surface ............................................................................................ 4
Figure 2.3: Infiltration of water though shoulders/verge .............................................................................. 4
Figure 2.4: Infiltration of water via the subgrade ......................................................................................... 5
Figure 2.5: Schematic of surface drainage ................................................................................................. 5
Figure 2.6: Typical pavement drain ............................................................................................................. 6
Figure 2.7: Formation drain – drains lower layers of the wider road formation ........................................... 7
Figure 3.1: Examples of subsurface pavement drain types ........................................................................ 8
Figure 3.2: Example transverse pavement drain cross-sections ................................................................ 9
Figure 3.3: Examples of unsatisfactory pavement drainage ..................................................................... 10
Figure 3.4: Examples of satisfactory pavement drainage ......................................................................... 11
Figure 3.5: Example pavement drain cross sections ................................................................................ 13
Figure 3.6: Techniques for lowering a watertable ..................................................................................... 15
Figure 5.1: Example design procedure for pavement drains .................................................................... 21
Figure 5.2: Infiltration of water through surfacing – showing wet intermediate-asphalt layer ...................22
Figure 5.3: Example permeability ranges of soils and road-making materials .........................................25
Figure 5.4: Principles of granular filter material design ............................................................................. 28
Figure 5.5: Example plotted filter criteria................................................................................................... 30
Figure 5.6: Example filter material grading ............................................................................................... 31
Figure 5.7: Example procedure to check compatibility of filters with soils and pipes ...............................32
Figure 5.8: Typical uses of geotextiles as filters ....................................................................................... 35
Figure 5.9: Example result of geotextile sieving test ................................................................................. 36
Figure 5.10: Piping and permeability limits for a well-graded residual soil .................................................38
Figure 5.11: Geotextile being used as a first-stage filter ............................................................................. 40
Austroads 2009 | page ii

1. Introduction
The target audience for the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology includes all those involved with the
management of roads, including industry, and students seeking to learn more about the fundamental
concepts, principles, issues and procedures associated with pavement technology.
1.1 Guide to Pavement Technology
This Part should be read in conjunction with the other parts of the Guide to Pavement Technology:
• Part 1 Introduction to Pavement Technology
• Part 2 Pavement Structural Design
• Part 3 Pavement Surfacings
• Part 4 Pavement Materials:
– Part 4A: Granular Base and Subbase Materials
– Part 4B: Asphalt
– Part 4C: Materials for Concrete Road Pavements
– Part 4D: Stabilised Materials
– Part 4E: Recycled Materials
– Part 4F: Bituminous Binders
– Part 4G: Geotextiles and Geogrids
– Part 4H: Test Methods
– Part 4I: Earthworks Materials
– Part 4J: Aggregate and Source Rock
– Part 4K: Seals
– Part 4L: Stabilising Binders
• Part 5 Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design
• Part 6 Unsealed Pavements
• Part 7 Pavement Maintenance
• Part 8 Pavement Construction
• Part 9 Pavement Work Practices
• Part 10 Subsurface Drainage.
It is emphasised that this document should be used only as a guide and not as a limiting or standard
specification. Considerable judgement is required to define the scope and nature of investigations and to
select the parameters for incorporation into both the evaluation and design processes. In addition, some
road agencies have published manuals or supplements that translate the guidance provided by Austroads
into practice reflecting local materials, environments, loadings and pavement performance.
Austroads 2009 | page 1

1.2 Scope of Part 10 of the Guide to Pavement Technology
This Part of the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology is intended to give the practitioner an overview of
the issues involved in the design and management of subsurface drainage systems.
This Part contains brief descriptions of the topics listed below:

• types and uses of subsurface drainage systems
• causes and effects of moisture ingress
• site investigation and assessment for subsurface drainage
• design of pavement drains
• construction and maintenance considerations.
Part 10: Subsurface Drainage – provides advice on the general requirements for drainage materials, design
of pavement drains and construction and maintenance considerations. The advice has been developed from
the approaches followed by Austroads member authorities. However, as it encompasses the wide range of
materials and conditions found in Australia and New Zealand, some parts are broadly based.
Guidance on surface drainage and formation drains is provided in the Guide to Road Design – Part 5: Road
Drainage (Austroads 2008b).
Additional guidance on construction of drainage systems is provided in the Guide to Pavement Technology –
Part 8: Pavement Construction (Austroads 2009c) and maintenance of drainage systems is discussed in the
Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 7: Pavement Maintenance (Austroads 2009b).

2. Moisture Ingress and Drainage Systems
2.1 General
In Australia and New Zealand, roads are designed to varying standards and operate in a very wide range of
moisture environments. The moisture regime associated with a pavement has a major influence on its
performance. In particular, the stiffness/strength of unbound materials and subgrades is heavily dependent
on the moisture content of materials. As such, knowledge of the sources of moisture and methods by which it
can enter a road structure is of paramount importance for the adequate design of a subsurface drainage
system.
2.2 Sources of Moisture Ingress
Moisture changes in pavements usually result from one or more of the following sources:
• seepage from verges, medians or higher ground to the road pavement
• capillary action or fluctuations in the height of the watertable
• infiltration of water through the surface of the road pavement and the shoulders
• an abrupt, significant decrease in the relative permeabilities of the successive layers in the pavement
(permeability reversal) causing saturation of the materials in the vicinity of the permeability reversal
• the transfer of moisture, in either the liquid (i.e. soil suction) or vapour states, as a result of moisture
content or temperature differences within or beneath the pavement, due to the moisture content at
construction differing from the equilibrium moisture content
• the transfer of moisture due to osmotic pressure in the vicinity of the root structures of large vegetation.
Of the above sources of moisture ingress, the initial four can be controlled by the installation of properly-
designed subsurface drains.
Figure 2.1: Sources of moisture
Source: Gerke (1987)

2.2.1 Surface
It is rare that thin bituminous surfacings are ever 100% watertight. Various studies have shown that given
certain conditions over sufficient lengths of pavement, even newly placed so-called waterproof surfaces permit
some moisture to infiltrate into the base layer. Mostly the small amounts of water are sucked and dispersed
into the granular layer or slowly evaporate back through the surfacing often without damage to the
pavement. At other times, moisture build-up within the base layer may prevent dissipation and subsequent
vehicular loading causes very high hydrostatic pressures which cause localised erosion of the base material
leading to the ejection of fine particles through the surfacing. This may be the genesis of a pot hole.
Figure 2.2: Infiltration of water via the surface
Source: VicRoads (2004a)
Thicker surfacings offer additional protection to any granular base layer. Significantly less water would be
expected to penetrate to the base via the air voids within thick asphalt layers (> 60 mm) compared with thin
asphalt layers and bituminous sprayed seals. However ‘cold construction’ joints in asphalt may permit entry
of water through seemingly thick asphalt layers particularly if joints in adjacent layers line-up. For all
surfacing types, water entry through cracks is a prime source of water entry. Even concrete pavements have
their joints, both longitudinal and transverse, which though typically sealed, still permit relatively large quantities
of water through to the subbase and subgrade.
2.2.2 Shoulder/Verge
Shoulders, particularly unsealed shoulders, may be the greatest source of water entry for those pavements
with ‘intact’ surfacing. Pavements which have an edge-drop (at the shoulder) or pot-holes within shoulders
form ready made reservoirs trapping surface runoff and directly charging the shoulder base and subbase
with water. Water may then enter the pavement and subgrade either by gravity or by soil suction.
Figure 2.3: Infiltration of water though shoulders/verge

2.2.3 Subgrade
The pavement foundation named the subgrade, can in certain circumstances, be a source of water,
particularly if it intersects a confined aquifer. The confinement by overlying layers of more impermeable
materials often means that as well as trapping water, the water may also be under a head of pressure thus
adding to the task of draining the pavement structure.
Figure 2.4: Infiltration of water via the subgrade
2.3 Types of Drainage Systems
There are three broad types of drainage systems:

• surface drainage
• subsurface drainage
• drainage blankets.
2.3.1 Surface Drainage
Slope/crossfall, elevation, catch drains and table drains provide primary surface drainage. The easiest and
most used technique is elevation and cross-fall – lifting the pavement from its surrounds in conjunction with
sloping its surface to remove any rainfall by the quickest path has been the basis of surface drainage for
thousands of years.
Figure 2.5: Schematic of surface drainage
Current surface drainage practices are well documented in road design procedures and are not addressed in
this document. Design of surface drains is discussed in the Guide to Road Design – Part 5: Road Drainage
(Austroads 2008b) and construction of surface drains is discussed in the Guide to Pavement Technology –
Part 8: Pavement Construction (Austroads 2009c).

2.3.2 Subsurface Drainage
Given that water may infiltrate a pavement structure (pavement materials and supporting subgrade) from
many sources, subsurface drains aim to intercept, collect and then discharge water from beneath the
pavement. Subsurface drains can be divided into two broad categories: pavement drains and formation
drains.
Subsurface pavement drains
Subsurface drainage systems are generally installed in a road either to remove water from the subgrade and
pavement materials or to intercept water before it reaches the road structure. The former type is knows as a
pavement drain, and the latter is called a cut-off or a formation drain.
Pavement drains are used to remove water from the pavement layers and immediate subgrade as shown in
Figure 2.6. They are also used to prevent the infiltration of water from shoulders, medians or verges into the
pavement. They are sometimes used to cut off shallow groundwater seepage.
Figure 2.6: Typical pavement drain
Further details on subsurface pavement drains are given in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6.
Subsurface formation drains
Where the earthworks that support the prepared subgrade and pavement, or existing subgrade becomes
subject to excessive moisture, formation drains, as shown in Figure 2.7, may be necessary. Cut-off or
formation drains are used to intercept water before it reaches the road structure. They are designed to be
deeper than pavement drains, carry greater flows than pavement drains and are usually remote from the
pavement.

Figure 2.7: Formation drain – drains lower layers of the wider road formation
Subsurface formation drains are discussed in the Guide to Road Design – Part 5: Road Drainage (Austroads
2008b).
2.3.3 Drainage Blankets
Where a pavement intercepts a subterranean water source providing substantial flows or the nature of the
water-bearing strata is such that interception by formation or pavement drains is not possible, the pavement
may need to be fully supported by a drain comprising a ‘blanket’ of free-draining material as shown in Figure
3.6.
The Guide to Road Design – Part 5: Road Drainage (Austroads 2008b) contains principles for drainage
blanket design.

3. Types and Uses of Subsurface Pavement Drains
3.1 Types of Subsurface Pavement Drains
Subsurface pavement drains typical comprise of drainage pipe(s) which may be surrounded by a single
stage filter or by two stage filters. Filter materials may consist of aggregates (ranging in size from sand to
cobble size), geotextiles or combinations of aggregates and geotextiles. Examples of pavement drains are
shown in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1: Examples of subsurface pavement drain types
Source: VicRoads (2004b)

Transverse pavement drains are required to limit the length of flow paths within the pavement where
combinations of crossfall, grade and curvature lead to long drainage paths, and also at other locations where
water problems in pavements commonly occur, for example cut to fill lines. Figure 3.2 shows example cross
sections of transverse drains.
Figure 3.2: Example transverse pavement drain cross-sections

3.2 Selection of Pavement Drain Type and Filter Type
Table 3.1 is an example guide for the initial selection of pavement drain type and filter type. The filter
materials should be confirmed using the procedure described in Section 5.
Table 3.1: Example guide to selection of subsurface drain type and filter type
Permeability Type of pavement Filter material (refer

Parent soil type
range (m/sec) drain (Figure 3.1) to Table 5. & Table 5.)
Homogenous clay with very low permeability <10-9 Type 3 or Type 4 Sand (Grade A1 to A3)
Silty or sandy clays and stratified clays with 10-9 to 10-5 Type 2, Type 3 or Sand (Grade A4 to A6)
moderate low permeability Type 4
>10-5 Type 1 or Type 2 Aggregate (Grade B1
Clean sand or gravel with high permeability
or B2)
Solid rock or clean broken rock with high Not applicable Type 1 Aggregate (Grade B3
permeability to permeable fissures or B4)
Note: Type 4 subsurface drains may be substituted for a Type 2 or Type 3 pavement drain if located in fill areas or
within pavement layers such as at the interface between two pavement types.
For locations where the installation of guardrail behind the kerb and channel may result in damage to the
drainage system, consideration should be given to locating the trench immediately below the kerb and
channel.
Some examples of cross sections with unsatisfactory pavement drainage are illustrated in Figure 3.3.
Figure 3.3: Examples of unsatisfactory pavement drainage

Some examples of cross sections with satisfactory pavement drainage are illustrated in Figure 3.4.
Figure 3.4: Examples of satisfactory pavement drainage
Premature distress due to the presence of water in pavements is unacceptable in high class road facilities
such as freeways. For this reason pavement drains should be provided even if no specific pavement water
problems are envisaged.
For lower road categories, pavement drain locations need not be so frequent and, in some cases, pavement
drainage need only be provided if specific water problems are foreseen. Good continuous drainage of
pavements can often be obtained at little or no extra cost by careful attention to permeabilities of materials in
contact with one another.

Generally, pavement drainage systems consisting of longitudinal drains with transverse drains at selected
locations to prevent long drainage paths have proved more economical than drainage blankets or full-width
pavement construction.
3.3 Location of Pavement Drains
The location of pavement drains depends on the class of road and operating environment. The following
illustrates the recommended guidelines for use of pavement drains by VicRoads (2004a).
3.3.1 Freeways
Longitudinal pavement drains:

• on low sides of pavements
• on both sides of pavements at the cut to fill lines
• on both sides of pavements in cuts where seepage is encountered during construction or considered
likely after wet weather
• on both sides of pavements in cuts where the grade is about 0.2% or less
• on both sides of pavements where changes in crossfall result in a pavement slope of about 2% or less
• adjacent to the pavement if the median invert is less than 200 mm below the adjacent subgrade level
• along both sides of new pavement with kerb and channel.
Transverse pavement drains:

• at such locations as to limit the length of drainage paths within the pavement to about 50 m
• superelevation points where pavement crossfall is zero require special consideration
• at cut to fill locations
• downgrade at any suspected seepage areas
• at both ends of impermeable obstructions e.g. bridge abutments and approach slabs.
3.3.2 Urban Arterials
Longitudinal pavement drains:

• on low sides of pavements
• at the edge of existing pavements when widening is carried out
• adjacent to pavements on both sides of unpaved medians with fixed watering systems or wider than
about 6 m
• in the centre only of unpaved medians without fixed watering and less than about 6 m wide (this
technically becomes a formation drain)
• on the low side only of medians with more than about 10% crossfall
• along both sides of new pavement with kerb and channel.

Transverse pavement drains:

• at superelevation points where pavement crossfall is zero
• at cut to fill locations
• up to 10 m downgrade at any suspected seepage areas.
Use of prefabricated geotextile fin drains
Pending the outcomes of monitoring projects, geocomposite fin drains may be considered for use as follows:
• as a pavement drain on the low side of pavement where subgrade level is above natural surface level
• as a pavement drain at the interface between two pavement types having significant difference in
permeability or depths, in locations where ground water could be trapped between the two types of
pavement
• rural arterials.
No standard locations are given as pavement drains need only be provided where problems are anticipated.
However careful consideration should be given to the permeabilities of pavement materials and the
economics of full-width pavement construction.
3.4 Pavement Drain Cross Sections
The type of cross section chosen for pavement drains depends on availability and cost of filters, both
granular and geotextile, and their compatibility with the surrounding soil. Figure 3.5 illustrates example
pavement drain cross sections. Those drain types which do not utilise a collection or discharge pipe cannot
be properly maintained and are therefore not recommended for permanent installations.
Figure 3.5: Example pavement drain cross sections

In any given situation it is quite common for any of the type cross sections as shown in Figure 3.5 to be
equally satisfactory from a technical viewpoint. Type D using flexible plastic pipe and a knitted filter sock are
generally more economical to construct than other two stage filter systems.
Drainage pipes 100 mm in diameter are typically used for pavement drains.
3.5 Pavement Drains below Kerb and Channel
Whilst kerb and channel is designed and constructed to facilitate the removal of water from the road surface,
considerable water from the kerb and channel can itself enter the pavement. Possible sources of water from
kerb and channel include the following:
• kerb and channel joints and contraction cracks
• interface with fill material placed behind kerb and channel particularly when the fill material is susceptible
to moisture changes e.g. shrinkage resulting in a gap, and to the low-backfilling behind kerb and channel
• rotation of kerb and channel due to heavy loading resulting in gap at interface with pavement or fill
• through poorly compacted concrete resulting in a more porous material.
In addition, for locations where the pavement is constructed in cut, the likelihood of water entry into the
pavement from behind the kerb and channel increases significantly.
Therefore, kerb and channel, particularly in cut locations should be considered as a potential source of water
entry into the pavement and consideration should be given to intercepting this water by:
• locating subsurface drains beneath or just behind kerb and channel
• providing a positive connection of the underside of kerb and channel to the subsurface drain.
In relation to the latter dot-point, the positive connection may be achieved via extending the pavement
drainage trench backfill to the underside of the kerb and channel. Adequate support for the kerb and channel
must however, be provided to prevent deflection/rotation under heavy loading. Settlement of the kerb and
channel is likely to occur with a wide trench and poorly compacted filter material. Alternatives to continuing
the trench backfill for its full width to the underside of the kerb and channel are to:
• Excavate a narrow ‘slot’ up to 100 mm wide through the kerb and channel bedding, immediately and
centrally above the main subsurface drainage trench which is often about 300 mm wide. This method
allows for the support of the kerb and channel although additional care must be taken in the construction
of the subsurface drainage system.
• Bed the kerb and channel on no-fines concrete.
3.6 Special Purpose Pavement Drainage Systems
3.6.1 Pavement Widenings
For patches and new pavement construction where the new pavement material is likely to trap water within
the adjacent existing materials, subsurface drainage should be installed on the high side of the new
pavement. If the bottom of the new pavement is located within the subgrade such that it creates a sump,
subsurface drainage should also be installed on the low side of the pavement. A ‘no-fines’ concrete should
be used to backfill subsurface drainage trenches located under trafficked pavement. If the drain pipe or
prefabricated geocomposite fin drain is located within a fine silt or clay subgrade, filter sand should be placed
around the drain prior to backfilling with ‘no fines’ concrete to prevent fine silty particles from entering and
blocking the drains. For significant works, drainage design as discussed earlier should be undertaken.

3.6.2 Lowering a Water Table
The level of a static water table can be lowered to an extent that the structural elements of roads are not
affected by either free water or capillary rise using two basic techniques. This is achieved by the use of
formation drains parallel to the formation, and blanket drains beneath the pavement or formation. A
combination of the two is sometimes employed. Some techniques for lowering a water table are illustrated in
Figure 3.6.
Figure 3.6: Techniques for lowering a watertable
Section 5.7 of the Guide to Roads Design – Part 5: Drainage Design (Austroads 2008b) details methods to
design drain spacings to lower the water table. Alternatively, an empirical approach may be used based on a
field trial either before or during the early construction phase of a project. Trenches can be dug, and flows
and water table levels can then be measured. In cases where the material is relatively free-draining,
pertinent observations may present quite quickly, but long periods of time might be required for slow draining
materials. If an intuitively expected observation is not readily obtained the trenches can be deepened or
more trenches dug at closer spacing.
Whilst this practical technique may provide more reliable answers for the conditions of the field test, it should
be recognised that the worst condition may not have been encountered in the trial.

3.6.3 Expansive Subgrades
Major works requiring the construction of pavements over an expansive subgrade require special attention in
the design of subsurface drainage systems. For these works it has become common practice to place a very
low permeability earthworks layer over the expansive soil prior to pavement construction. This is undertaken
in an attempt to keep the moisture content of the expansive soil constant and uniform for the full pavement
width. Non-uniform fluctuations in moisture content will lead to the expansive material swelling/shrinking thus
resulting in pavement shape loss.
In this instance subsurface drains are placed such that at least 100 mm of the low permeability material
remains beneath the trench invert. As such the subsurface drain acts as a pavement drain only and does not
come into contact with the expansive soil. This is to isolate changing moisture conditions of the drainage
systems from the volumetrically unstable soil.
Additional precautions must be taken for situations where an existing pavement located on an expansive
subgrade is to be widened. In these cases a subsurface drain may be required at the joint due to changes in
pavement depth and/or permeability. To prevent the subsurface drain coming into contact with the expansive
soil, a high density polyethylene sheet can be used to line the trench and act as an impermeable barrier.
Care is required to ensure that the sheeting does not prevent the system from acting as a pavement drain.
3.6.4 Other Special Purpose Drainage Systems
Other locations/situations that should be considered for subsurface drainage include:

• bridge abutments and approach slabs or other impermeable barriers which require transverse drains
• soft areas, whether excavated and backfilled or not, provided a drainage outlet can be obtained
• large pipe trenches, underground water courses, service conduits and water supply pipes and existing or
abandoned utility trenches backfilled with permeable material
• along the high side of pavement where seepage is evident, or where water may enter from batters, full-
width pavement, service trenches or abutting properties
• along both sides of the pavement where the cross slope is flatter than 0.02 m/m e.g. in transitions to
superelevation.

4. Site Investigation and Assessment for Subsurface

Drainage
4.1 General
Before a subsurface drainage system is designed, the permeability and soil water suction characteristics of
all materials within the road environment should be assessed. Graphs which relate permeability to grading,
such as those presented in Appendix A, may be used for preliminary investigation; however, a laboratory
permeability determination is the only accurate method for assessing the permeability during the detailed
design stage.
If core sampling of cutting floors is undertaken as part of the site investigation, then the permeability of cores
representing the various strata likely to be critical below the pavement design level should be determined.
Although the groundwater may not be encountered during the site investigation it should be remembered
that, if the materials are sufficiently permeable, rapid fluctuations of water tables or sudden flows in inclined
permeable layers may occur during prolonged rainfall.
4.2 Scope of Investigation
The scope of an investigation will depend on local site conditions and the importance of the road. Objectives
for investigation should be specified for each project, aiming at providing information on the range of
groundwater conditions at the site so that a worst condition may be predicted for design purposes. The
requirements of both construction and in-service performance must be considered.
Site information on groundwater should indicate the location of high water tables, springs and aquifers that
may influence the stability of cuts or fills, or permit the ingress of water into the vicinity of the pavement. In
many situations the design of stable slopes or embankments will require complementary subsurface
drainage systems. A study of the permeability and dispersivity (tendency to disperse when wet) of the soils
should also be undertaken.
The investigation can vary in magnitude from a short site visit to detailed geological mapping supported by
drilling, in situ testing, sampling, laboratory testing and field inspections extending over a range of seasonal
conditions. If for example, surface water or wet conditions during construction persist for several days or
weeks after rain ceases, a thorough assessment is usually warranted to determine the extent of groundwater
flows. Large investigations may extend from the early planning phase of a project to well into the
construction phase. It is desirable however, that they be completed before the road grade line is fixed.
Investigations may require input from various disciplines – route planning, design (geometric, structural,
pavement etc.), construction and maintenance and geotechnical specialists.
4.3 Large Scale Investigations
4.3.1 General
There are usually two identifiable phases to large-scale investigations. The first comprises reconnaissance
studies, usually in conjunction with the route location investigations. The second phase comprises
exploration of subsurface conditions along the chosen route and obtaining detailed design information. The
reconnaissance studies provide a basis for planning the second phase investigations. Both phases require
input from geotechnical specialists.

For significant projects in complex site conditions it is advisable during route location to initiate a
comprehensive second phase investigation, which will be carried out during the early stages of detailed
design.
4.3.2 Reconnaissance Studies
Reconnaissance studies take a wide view of the moisture regime. They rely heavily on the observation and
recording of surface features such as topography, geology, surface water, springs, erosion, vegetation, etc.
Particular attention should be paid to the following:
• physical conditions on nearby roads
• presence of vegetation which usually occurs in wet environments
• local experience which may explain observations of interest
• erodability of the land, particularly if there is evidence on existing roads of scour in table drains, erosion of
batters and siltation of drains
• regional geology, including possible groundwater recharge areas
• information already available including aerial photographs, geological and topographical maps, and the
results of any previous investigations in the area e.g. ground-water bore data.
Features which reveal possible moisture problems (e.g. groundwater or erosion) should be made the subject
of particular attention in the second phase, quantitative investigations.
4.3.3 Quantitative Subsurface Investigations
Reconnaissance studies rely mainly on comparative qualitative assessments of site conditions, whilst the
second phase studies are aimed at providing quantitative data for design. An awareness of the effects of
moisture on the strength and volume stability of soil and pavement materials must influence any
investigation. Investigations are usually carried out by geotechnical specialists, although specialised
equipment and techniques are not always necessary, and in many cases a considerable amount of
information can be obtained by project personnel in consultation with the appropriate specialists.
The following information can be used to assess groundwater conditions:

• rainfall records at the site, and particularly for the duration of any investigation and preferably over a
period of 50 years
• documentation of any seepage, near surface or subgrade water, and surface flow observations made
during construction
• flow rate monitoring from pits, trenches or subsurface drains
• soil classification and moisture content/dry density relationships and in situ moisture contents of materials
at subgrade level and at other levels in areas where water is present
• observations of capillary rise, with careful note of the water table level, in cuttings and trenches.
The most direct methods of assessing groundwater conditions are by drilling and installing water monitoring
standpipes, and the opening of test pits and trenches. Soil horizons, strata and structure can be observed
and samples taken for laboratory testing. The nature, size and orientation of structures (joints, faults,
fissures, tube roots etc.) within the soil and rock mass should be closely observed and recorded. The
moisture content of materials should be noted and samples taken at intervals for moisture content
determination. In situ testing may include strength tests on materials in bore holes and infiltration tests which
may reveal the presence of moisture. The use of resistivity testing may be considered to evaluate ground
water levels but in practice such data must be correlated with actual water level measurements.

Groundwater levels may be assessed using a piezo-cone penetrometer fitted with a pressure transducer.
Boreholes, pits and trenches allow groundwater levels and flows to be observed. Water levels and inflows
should be carefully recorded at the time of excavation. Rainfall records can be correlated with the locations
and rates of movement of standing water levels, preferably by monitoring over a time which includes wet
periods. Pumping tests can be used to establish the in situ permeability of materials at depth, and the ability
of groundwater to replenish water removed.
The correct installation of standpipes to measure water level, or piezometers to measure water pressure,
requires geotechnical understanding involving among other things, careful observation of the materials
intersected by the bore so that they are installed in the materials for which information is required. Installation
of all standpipes at a similar or pre-determined level may ignore likely variations in level of the soil strata which
influences watertable level. Incorrectly installed standpipes may give misleading results and the resulting
erroneous data can significantly impact groundwater assessments and subsequent drainage design.
In some cases, the presence of a perched, near-surface watertable may have a greater detrimental effect on
a pavement than does a deeper, regional watertable. In such cases, short standpipes are installed to
measure fluctuation in the near-surface zones. Perched watertables can also be investigated by observing
water inflow into shallow test pits and trenches.
Where an existing road is under investigation, it is necessary to assess the moisture conditions within the
existing pavement and subgrade, and also the effectiveness of the various elements of the existing drainage
system. Surface infiltration testing may assist in explaining subsequent moisture test results. The moisture
conditions within the existing pavement can be assessed in test pits or by sampling and laboratory testing.
These moisture contents are usually compared to a yardstick such as the plastic limit or optimum moisture
content determined by appropriate laboratory compaction testing on the material. The field records should
describe the existing elements including the type, width and condition (material type, shape and
permeability), the condition of the table drains and subsurface drains and the overall site drainage
conditions.

5. Design of Subsurface pavement drains
5.1 General
Pavement drains are provided to remove surface infiltration water from the pavement layers, to prevent
infiltration of water from shoulders, medians or verges into the pavement, and sometimes to cut off shallow
lateral groundwater seepage. Pavement drains are not suitable for the disposal of surface water during
construction, as the soil particles carried in such water may clog the filters or silt up the system.
The following apply to the design of pavement drains:

• no pavement layer should be entirely surrounded by materials of lower permeability
• pavement drains should be in direct contact with all pavement layers
• if this is not possible, the flow path to the sub-pavement drain should proceed through materials of
increasing permeability
• the capacity of the system should be adequate to dispose of estimated quantities of water from surface
ingress or other sources.
5.2 Design Procedure
The design of subsurface pavement drains usually consists of the steps listed in Table 5. and described
thereafter.
Table 5.1: Subsurface pavement drain design steps
Step Activity Reference

1 Estimation of flows of all sources of water into the structural elements of the road Section 5.3
2 Calculation of drainage layer permeability requirements Section 5.4
3 Calculation of filter permeability and width of trench requirements Section 5.5
4 Checking compatibility of filters with soils and pipes Section 5.6
5 Selection of pipe size and grade Section 5.7
6 Consideration of construction and maintenance issues Section 6
In many situations, particularly in rural areas, flows as a result of pavement infiltration may be directly
discharged from drainage layers into table drains instead of into subsurface drainage systems. In such cases
the design process above needs only to be followed for steps 1 and 2.
An example flowchart for design of pavement drains is illustrated in Figure 5.1.
Appendix B contains an example of steps 1 to 4 of the pavement drain design method. Appendix C contains
an example application of step 4 for checking compatibility of filters with soils and pipes used by VicRoads
(2004a).

Figure 5.1: Example design procedure for pavement drains

5.3 Estimating Inflow
As discussed in Section 2, road surfaces are permeable and may have defects or joints which permit the
entry of water into the pavement structure. Figure 5.2 shows an example of water infiltration through a newly
placed dense-graded asphalt wearing course. A material such as asphalt may decrease in permeability with
time due to traffic compaction and surface clogging; however, cracks often occur as the pavement ages and
usually become the most significant source of ingress of water.
Figure 5.2: Infiltration of water through surfacing – showing wet intermediate-asphalt layer
For design purposes, the rate at which water enters a surface is determined by applying an infiltration factor
to the maximum rainfall in one hour that can be expected to occur on the average of once each year: that is:
k = R max x IC
where
k = coefficient of permeability, also known as infiltration rate (m/s)
R max = maximum one hour rainfall per annum (m/s)
IC = infiltration coefficient (Table 5.)
This method implies that a proportion of rainfall will infiltrate various surfaces. An example of suggested
ranges for surface infiltration coefficients are given in Table 5.. Note that if the surface of the shoulders is
different from the traffic lanes, the infiltration rates for each surface type will need to be calculated.

Table 5.2: Example of surface infiltration coefficients
Surface type Infiltration coefficient

Sprayed seal 0.2 – 0.25
Dense-graded asphalt 0.2 – 0.4
Concrete 0.3 – 0.4
Unsealed shoulders 0.4 – 0.6
Source: Adapted from VicRoads (2004a)
Using the infiltration rate, the inflow or quantity of water entering the pavement surface is determined by
applying Darcy’s Law as follows:
q = i (k lW l + k sW s)
where
q = volume rate of water (m3/s) entering the surface per metre length of carriageway
kl = coefficient of permeability of traffic lanes (m/s)
ks = coefficient of permeability of shoulders (m/s)
Wl = total width of traffic lanes (m)
Ws = total width of shoulders (m)
i = hydraulic gradient (head loss per unit length), a value of unity is commonly used for rain
falling on the road surface (m/m)
In addition to infiltration of water through the pavement surface, subsurface flows such as groundwater and
the effect of vehicle tyres on surface water infiltration pressures may also need to be considered (Gerke
1987).
5.4 Estimating Seepage through Pavements
5.4.1 General
The idealised sketches of groundwater regimes presented in textbooks tend to give a misleading impression
of the actual groundwater conditions encountered in practice. Simple diagrams showing areas of uniform but
differing permeability separated by well defined boundaries rarely apply to natural ground conditions. It is
much more common to encounter soil or rock formations having highly heterogeneous and anisotropic
permeabilities, often associated with multiple water tables, artesian conditions and capillary rise. Fissures,
joints, faults and bedding planes in soil or rock structures, depending on their interconnection, can result in
large hydrostatic head differences over short distances which may vary rapidly or only slowly during
recharge or drainage. As discussed in Section 4, the correct positioning of piezometers and standpipes to
intersect the various aquifers is therefore of the utmost importance.
The application of theoretical models to complex natural situations can lead to errors which differ in
magnitude. The same can be true when natural conditions appear to differ only slightly from those of the
model. For these reasons field observation and measurement is often the best guide for estimating flows.
However interpretation of this information by those with geotechnical skills is required.

Theoretical models can give good results only if field conditions are close to those assumed in developing
the model. This applies particularly to constructed drains and pavements. The generalised form of Darcy’s
Law, for saturated laminar flow conditions, can be used for this purpose and expressed as:
q = kiA
where
q = volume rate of flow (m3/s) per metre length of carriageway
k = coefficient of permeability (m/s)
A = cross-sectional area (m2)
i = hydraulic gradient (head loss per unit length) (m/m)
5.4.2 Determining the Required Permeability of Pavement or Drainage Layers
Rearrangement of Darcy’s Law, permits any one of the parameters to be determined provided the other
three are known.
Thus Darcy’s Law can be used to determine flows and permeabilities in soils to allow determination of the
physical dimensions and slope of drains and drainage layers. Darcy’s Law can also be used to determine the
permeability required of pavement or drainage layers to dispose of calculated quantities of infiltration water
as shown below.
k = q / (i x A)
For disposal of infiltration water transversely into a pavement drain the hydraulic gradient can be taken as
the vectorial sum of the layer’s crossfall and longitudinal grade.
In most cases the pavement will not be designed to dispose of infiltration water into a pavement drain.
Instead, provided the permeability of the pavement is equivalent to or higher than the permeability of the
surfacing, water entering the pavement will flow vertically through the pavement and into an underlying
drainage layer. In such cases, the permeability of the pavement needs to be greater than the surfacing
permeability (k l and k s) and only the permeability of the underlying drainage layer need be determined using
Darcy’s Law, as described above.
It is noted that this is not a strictly correct use of Darcy’s Law since in practice, the drainage layer, being
sufficiently permeable, would not be saturated completely, but only up to a curved saturation line. The true
solution to the problem uses a flow net for a two-dimensional laminar-flow condition as explained in
Cedergreen (1977) pp. 387 to 389. However, the answers obtained are similar.
5.4.3 Determining the Actual Permeability of Pavement or Drainage Layers
The laboratory determination of the coefficient of permeability of a material is based on Darcy’s Law at a
hydraulic gradient low enough to ensure laminar flow. Cedergreen (1977) describes field techniques, using
Darcy’s Law to determine permeabilities. An example of the ranges of permeability coefficient for various
materials is shown in Figure 5.3.
Field or laboratory determined permeability coefficients can be useful when used as a comparative guide in
the selection of pavement, shoulder, surfacing and drainage materials. Alternatively, Appendix A provides a
means of estimating permeability from grading.

Figure 5.3: Example permeability ranges of soils and road-making materials
A conservative approach to design is that where a range of permeabilities have been determined for a given
material, the design permeability used may be the highest or the lowest depending on the particular
circumstances. Where the material is supposed to act as a barrier to the flow of water, the highest
permeability is the value to use. Where the material is being used to allow water to pass through, the lowest
permeability is the value to use.
5.5 Determining Required Filter Permeability and Width of Trench
The required pavement drain filter permeability and width of trench can be calculated in the same manner as
used in Section 5.4.1. In order to maintain equilibrium the quantity of water entering the pavement drain must
be equal to the quantity of water entering the pavement or drainage layers.
Rearranging Darcy equation gives:
kf = q/iA
Assuming hydraulic gradient of 1 and A = W (width of trench) gives:
kf = q/W
Once the filter material permeability requirements have been determined and a suitable filter material
selected the compatibility of the filter material with the surrounding soils and the proposed pipe must be
checked using the method described in Section 5.6.

5.6 Compatibility of Filters with Soils and Pipes
5.6.1 General
Filter material is required in any permanent subsurface drainage system to prevent fine soil particles from
washing into the system. For satisfactory performance, filter material must be more permeable than the
surrounding material, but fine enough to support that material. In addition, the filter should be stable under
flow situations and should itself be prevented from washing into perforations or joints in drainage pipes.
Generally subsurface drain filters consist of granular materials or a combination of granular materials and
geotextile filters as follows:
• granular single stage filter
• geotextile first stage filter with coarse granular second stage filter
• fine granular first stage filter with geotextile second stage filter
• fine granular first stage filter with a coarser second stage filter.
If a single filter material that will filter the surrounding soil while at the same time not washing into the pipe is
not available, a second-stage filter will usually be necessary.
Filters must be permeable enough to carry anticipated flows (Section 5.5), sufficiently stable or continuous in
grading to avoid segregation during placement and piping (loss of material), and fine enough to prevent
penetration by the surrounding soil. In addition, the filter material should not penetrate the inlets to the
drainage pipe.
Procedures for the design of granular filter materials for medium and coarse-grained soils have been well
established for many years (e.g. Spalding 1970). The selection of geotextile filters in these soils depends on
drainage performance and also physical properties such as strength, durability and resistance to damage by
chemicals and light i.e. during storage and installation.
The basic rules given in this Section for the design of both granular and geotextile filters are based on the
grading of the adjacent pavement or drainage layer materials (Section 5.4) and on the size of pipe
perforations or the Equivalent Opening Size (EOS) of the geotextile (Sections 5.6.2 and 5.6.3).
Design procedures are not required for filters in fine grained materials such as silts and clays, and washed
sand, such as that denoted as Type A2 in Table 5., is usually specified. Type A1 would also be suitable. Any
material which would prevent the migration of such fine particles would not possess sufficient permeability,
and the cohesion of the soils is therefore relied upon to prevent migration. This generally does not present a
problem with clays, but in highly dispersive silts it is anticipated that the material will set up a natural filtration
boundary layer adjacent to the filter.
Filter materials are not usually necessary for use in temporary drainage systems or where the surrounding
soil is known to be very stable. Examples of stable materials are fractured rock, fissured or jointed heavy
clays or other weathered materials and naturally or artificially cemented materials. Care should be taken
however, to determine whether fissured or jointed materials are sufficiently stable under adverse conditions
to warrant dispensing with a filter material. Water flowing from joints should be examined for suspended
particles, and the susceptibility of the material to erosion should be determined.
Dispersiveness
Soils may be tested for dispersiveness (Emerson 1967) using Australian Standard AS 1289.3.8.1-2006. The
method allows for eight dispersion classes from E1 to E8, and can be interpreted as per Table 5..

Table 5.3: Emerson dispersive classes
Emerson Class No. Dispersion potential

E6, E7, E8 Very low
E4, E5 Low
E3 Low to moderate
E2 High
E1 Very high
Materials with Emerson Class Numbers of E2 or less should be considered as dispersive and the subsurface
drainage system designed accordingly. In these situations, specialist advice should be sought.
5.6.2 Design of Granular Filters
For coarser grained soils i.e. those having particles larger than the silt sized range, a number of design
procedures have been established. These operate on certain characterisations of soil and filter gradings.
Silts and clays, which constitute the majority of soils requiring subsurface drainage, require no filter design.
For other soils the steps shown in Table 5. should be applied. The grading or range of gradings of the soil
must be known. If the surrounding soil is gap graded or layered, the design should be based on the grading
of material finer than the gap or the finer layers. If the soil has a small number of large particles (greater than
40 mm), consideration should be given to a filter design based on the fraction smaller than 25 mm.
The gradings of filter materials and the surrounding soils are designated by the various particle sizes for
which given percentages by weight of the material are smaller. For example, D 15S designates the 15th
percentile particle size in the natural soil distribution i.e. 15% of the soil is smaller than D 15S mm. Similarly,
the symbol D 50F designates the 50th percentile particle size in the filter size distribution. The design criteria
are based on the inter-penetration mechanism illustrated in Figure 5.4.
Every boundary between adjacent materials should be examined before adopting a final design. In some
cases, it will not be possible to satisfy all requirements at all boundaries and a compromise will be
necessary.

Figure 5.4: Principles of granular filter material design
Source: Cedergreen 1977
Checking the compatibility of filters with soils and pipes consists of the steps listed in Table 5. and described
thereafter.
Table 5.4: Granular filter design steps
Step Activity
G1 Description of in situ material
G2 Grading analysis of in situ material
G3 Plot grading of in situ material
G4 Determine particle size characteristics (D10 S, D15 S, D50 S, D60 S, D85S and D100 S)
G5 Calculate Coefficient of Uniformity, U S
G6 Calculate filter criteria
G7 Plot filter criteria to give grading limits of filter material
G8 Select filter material
G9 Eliminate segregation of filter by limiting the Coefficient of Uniformity (UF)

If a number of materials (for example base and subbase) are required to drain into a pavement drain, all
should be checked for compatibility with the filter material.
An example flowchart for checking compatibility of filters with soils and pipes is detailed in Figure 5.7.
Appendix C contains an example of the application of the compatibility checking procedure described in
Table 5..
Step G1 – Description of in situ material
The description of the in situ material, the material to be drained by the granular filter, should be sufficient to
identify the function and relationship of the in situ material to other materials in the general road structure as
well as describe its major physical characteristics.
Step G2 – Grading analysis of in situ material
The particle size distribution or sieve analysis of the in situ material should be determined in accordance with
AS 1289.3.6.1 or AS 1141.11. It is typical to perform grading analysis only of material passing the 19 mm
sieve.
Step G3 – Plot grading of in situ material
The results obtained from the particle size distribution test should be plotted as a graph and a smooth curve
drawn through the points. If less than 10% passes 13.5 µm then the 2 µm result is not required.
Step G4 – Determine particle size characteristics
From the grading plot read off the sieve opening sizes which will allow 85% of the drainage material to pass.
This procedure is repeated for 60%, 50%, 15% and 10% passing. These readings are designated D10 S, D15
S, D50 S, D60 S, D85 S and D100 S.
Step G5 – Calculate Coefficient of Uniformity (US)
To prevent soil particle migration at the filter/in situ material interface (i.e. from the in situ material into the
filter) it is necessary to closely control the grading of the filter material. Therefore the Coefficient of Uniformity
(U) for the in situ material is calculated using the following equation:
US = D60 S / D10 S
Step G6 – Calculate filter criteria
The following filter criteria are typically calculated:

• maximum D15 F – ensures that the in situ material cannot infiltrate and clog the filter
• maximum D50 F – ensures that the gradings of the filter and in situ materials are compatible
• minimum D15 F – ensures that the filter material is far more permeable that the in situ material
• maximum D100 F – avoids the risk of filter material puncturing the pipe or damaging slots
• minimum D85 F – ensures that the filter material cannot enter the pipe and cause blockages.
It should be noted that the equations used to calculate the above filter criteria differ between road authorities.
Gerke (1987) uses the following equations to calculate filter criteria:

• D15 F ≤ 4 x D85 S
• D50 F ≤ 9.5 x D50 S for U S ≤ 15 OR D50 F ≤ 13.5 x D50 S for U S > 15
• D15 F ≥ 5 x D15 S
• D100 F ≤ 10 mm
• D85 F ≥ 3 x Width of slots (pipe) OR D85 F ≥ 3 x Maximum opening (filter sock).
As comparison, the equations used by VicRoads (2004a) to calculate filter criteria are:
• D15 F ≤ 5 x D85 S, for uniform materials (U S ≤ 1.5) use D15 F ≤ 6 x D85 S
• D15 F ≤ 20 x D15 S , for well graded materials (U S ≥ 4) use D15 F ≤ 40 x D85 S
• D50 F ≤ 25 x D50 S
• D15 F ≥ 5 x D15 S
• D100 F ≤ 75 mm
• D85 S ≥ Width of slots (pipe) x 1.2 AND Width of slots (pipe) ≥ 0.8mm.
Step G7 – Plot filter criteria to give grading limits of filter material
To identify acceptable filter materials the filter criteria calculated in step G6 should be plotted and compared
with particle size distribution plots for available filter materials. Materials which fall within the filter criteria
calculated in step G6 are deemed to be suitable. Figure 5.5 is an example of filter criteria plotted onto a
grading graph.
Figure 5.5: Example plotted filter criteria

Step G8 – Select filter material
Based on the comparison undertaken in step G7 a proposed filter material that meets the calculated filter
criteria can be selected. Figure 5.6 is an example of a proposed filter material plotted on the same grading
graph with the filter criteria.
Figure 5.6: Example filter material grading
Step G9 – Eliminate segregation of filter by limiting the Coefficient of Uniformity (UF)
To ensure minimal segregation and good permeability characteristics are maintained, the filter material
should have a Coefficient of Uniformity (U F) less than a specified maximum. Gerke (1987) recommends U F
≤ 5 while VicRoads (2004a) specify U F ≤ 20.
If a suitable filter material, that meets the requirements of steps G8 and G9, cannot be found a two stage
filter will be required. The design of a two stage filter uses the procedure described, twice in succession. First
a filter is designed to suit the surrounding (in situ) soil, and then that (fine) filter is treated as the soil
(subscript S) and a coarse filter (subscript F) is designed to suit it.

Figure 5.7: Example procedure to check compatibility of filters with soils and pipes

Standardised materials
Section 5.6.2 has described a method of designing a filter grading or checking the suitability of an available
filter for a particular application. However, some standardisation of gradings for granular filters is possible.
An example range of standard gradings is presented to cover most of the available suitable materials. These
example gradings are of two types:
• Type A: for use with natural soil, geotextile filters and pavement materials.
• Type B: for use as second stage filters to Type A, or with geotextile filters.
The example gradings are given in Table 5.5 and Table 5.6 and can be used in either of two ways:
• selection of a filter based on a description of the soil to be drained, by reference to Table 5.6 for natural
soils and for second stage filters or
• design of a filter grading by the rules given in Section 5.6.2, and then selecting a suitable filter from
among the standards.
Table 5.5: Type A (sands, uniformly graded fine aggregates and gravel) filter gradings
Type A Percentage passing sieve
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6
Description
of filter 5 mm one 6 – 8 mm one
Dune sand Course washed sand Sandy gravel
size size
37.5 mm 100
26.5 mm
19.0 mm 100 85 – 100
13.2 mm 90 – 100
9.50 mm 100 100 100 70 – 100 65 – 100
4.75 mm 90 – 100 90 – 100 70 – 100 28 – 100 45 – 82
2.36 mm 100 75 – 100 70 – 100 0 – 50 0 – 28 30 – 60
1.18 mm 95 – 100 50 – 98 40 – 65 0 – 10 0–8 15 – 40
600 µm 70 – 98 30 – 80 12 – 40 5 – 25
300 µm 30 – 60 10 – 40 0 – 16 0–5 0–5 0 – 10
150 µm 0 – 12 0–7 0–4 0– 5
75 µm 0 0–3 0–3 0–3 0–3 0–3
Fine to
Parent soil Silt and friable clays Sand silts medium Course sand Sandy silts
sands
Maximum pipe
0.4 mm 0.6 mm 1.5 mm 3.0 mm 3.3 mm 5.0 mm
slot width
Suitable
second stage B1 B2 B3 B4 B3 or B4
filter

Table 5.6: Type B (uniformly graded aggregates) filter gradings
Type B Percentage passing sieve
B1 B2 B3 B4
Direction of Filter 5 mm 6 – 8 mm 10 mm 19 mm
one size one size one size one size
37.5 mm
26.5 mm 100
19.0 mm 100 100 70 – 100
13.2 mm 90 – 100 90 – 100 0 – 30
9.50 mm 100 70 – 100 40 – 70 0 – 10
4.75 mm 70 – 100 28 – 100 0 – 15
2.36 mm 0 – 50 0 – 28 0–5 0–5
1.18 mm 0 – 10 0–8
600 µm
300 µm 0–5 0–5
150 µm
75 µm 0–3 0–3 0–3 0–3
With type With type With types With types
Proposed use
A1 A2 A3, A6 A4, A6
Maximum Pipe Slot 3.0 mm 3.3 mm 9.0 mm 15.0 mm
Size
Standard filter specifications such as the examples shown do not cover every situation and the guidelines
given in Section 5.6.2 can often be used to check whether an available material is suitable for a specific use.
Where filters are manufactured solely from crushed rock the product specification should consider:
• Source rock properties required for crushed rock base are suitable for all locations. Additional guidance is
provided in the Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 4J: Aggregate and Source Rock (Austroads
2008a).
• Source rock properties required for crushed rock subbase are only suitable for use outside the trafficked
portion of the road.
Some filter sands have been shown to be strongly acidic with pH values as low as 2.5 to 3.0. Subsurface
drainage placed adjacent to reinforced concrete or steel structures (including reinforced concrete pipes)
should not use such filter sands.
It should be noted that the various filters are suitable for use with pipes having slot widths only up to a
specified maximum.
5.6.3 Geotextile Filter Design
Geotextiles are commonly used as a filter medium, particularly as one of the stages in a two-stage filter
(Figure 5.11) because of cost savings. These cost savings are due to reduced quantities of granular filter
and construction expediency. Some typical applications are shown in Figure 5.8.

Figure 5.8: Typical uses of geotextiles as filters
Filter design criteria for filter fabric are based on the equivalent opening size (EOS). The EOS is defined as
the number of the Standard sieve having openings closest in size to the filter fabric openings.
Filter fabrics can be categorised according to the method of manufacture as follows:

• Woven – geotextiles may be made from single fibres, slit film or bundles of fibres woven together. The
resulting geotextiles generally have high tensile strength, high modulus and low elongation. Woven filter
fabrics generally are available in the range of EOS values between 150 and 600 μm. However the EOS
may decrease markedly when a slit film woven geotextile is subjected to soil pressures
• Non-woven – geotextiles where the fibres are bonded together by various processes such as needle
punching or thermal or melt bonding. Non-woven geotextiles can be made using continuous fibres or
short (staple) fibres and generally have lower tensile strength, lower modulus and higher elongation than
wovens. Non-woven geotextiles generally have a higher permeability, ranging from about 0.04 to 0.01 m/s,
but a lower EOS, generally in the range 20 to 500 μm, than wovens
• Composites – combination of woven and non-woven geotextiles, generally with high strength and
modulus and low EOS
• Knitted – available in Australia only in the form of ‘socks’. Although relatively strong, knitted geotextiles
exhibit high elongation. They have a relatively large but uniform EOS.
Regardless of the way the geotextile has been manufactured, the important design requirements are that the
filter retains the soil, does not clog and has adequate permeability.
Slit film woven geotextiles should not be used as a filter material because of the possible decrease in EOS
and permeability. However, monofilament woven geotextiles may be suitable, but generally for only a
second-stage filter. Note that some needle-punched geotextiles are hydrophobic until they become
saturated via a sufficient head of water.

The filtration mechanism for geotextile filters is similar to that for granular filters except that the filter layer
forms in the soil outside of the geotextile, rather than within the filter as per granular filters. The geotextile
allows fines from the soil adjacent to the filter to wash through leaving the larger soil particles. These larger
particles form the boundary layer of the filter.
Checking the compatibility of filters with soils and pipes consists of the steps listed in Table 5..
Table 5.7: Geotextile filter design steps
Step Activity
F1 Determine equivalent opening size
Determine retention criteria (piping) based on soil grain
F2
size
F3 Determine permeability criteria
F4 Determine clogging criteria
F5 Determine survivability criteria
F6 Determine durability criteria
Step F1 – Determine equivalent opening size
The most common method of determining the opening size of geotextiles is via dry sieving (AS3706.7,
method A). Alternative methods include wet sieving, mercury infusion, bubble point and image analysis
(direct microscope measurement).
Figure 5.9: Example result of geotextile sieving test

The dry sieving method involves sieving glass beads or natural sand fractions of known size through the
geotextile being tested, following a standard procedure (AS3706.7). The values of percentage (by mass) of
particles retained on the geotextile for each particle size are plotted on log-probability paper as shown in
Figure 5.9. A straight line is drawn through the points measured from which the desired O value is obtained
as shown in Figure 5.9. The result is usually expressed in terms of the Equivalent Opening Size, also
designated as O 95. A value of O 95 = 0.3 means that 95% of the test particle fraction with a diameter of 0.3
mm is retained on the geotextile after shaking. Alternative terms for EOS are AOS (apparent opening size)
and FOS (filter opening size) which are similar to but not necessarily exactly the same.
The sieving test is well accepted for finding a single representative value near maximum opening size for a
geotextile, such as O 95 or O 90. There will be differences in these values depending on the particular
procedure employed (wet, dry, or hydrodynamic, glass beads or sand etc.). Although Figure 5.9 would allow
the determination of an O 50 number, this value would not necessarily be an average opening size. It is
apparent that caution is needed if EOS values obtained with one particular method are used in filter criteria
which may be based on another method.
Step F2 – Determine retention criteria (piping) based on soil grain size
The piping limit can be determined using the following criteria (Lawson 1986):
O 90 < C x Dn
where
Dn = the diameter of the grain, the particle size below which n% of the whole sample lie
C = as determined by experiment for a specific soil type or geotextile (Figure 5.10)
Step F3 – Determine permeability criteria
Because a geotextile filter is much thinner than a granular filter, the total hydraulic head lost as water flows
through it is much less. It may therefore be argued that the above criteria is too severe. Giroud (1982)
suggested that the following criteria is adequate:
K filter < 0.1.K soil

Figure 5.10: Piping and permeability limits for a well-graded residual soil
Source: Lawson (1986)
Step F4 – Determine clogging criteria
System clogging may still occur even if both retention and permeability criteria are satisfied. Instability of the
base soil and contaminated seepage water are the main causes of clogging and blinding of filters, it may be
appropriate to conduct soil/geotextile filtration tests.
The best known clogging criteria is that based on the gradient ratio test. Studies by the US Corps of
Engineers (Haliburton and Wood 1982) have indicated that clogging of soil filter systems incorporating woven
and non-woven geotextiles occurs if the gradient ratio GR > 3.
If no specific geotextile permeability test results are available, use may be made of an alternative pore size
specification O 95 > D 15. If the complete pore size distribution is known,
O 15 = (0.8 to 1.2) D 15 and
O 50 = 0.2 to 1) D 50 as summarised by Fischer et al. (1990).
Step F5 – Determine survivability criteria
Survivability is the capacity of the geotextile to resist damage due to stresses imposed by construction
equipment and irregular ground surface. Survivability is essentially related to the strength, robustness and
elongation of the geotextile measured in laboratory tests.

Austroads (2008a) has adopted the G-rating of geotextiles as an index to define survivability. The G-rating (or
robustness classification) is based on the results of the drop cone test (AS 3706.5-2000) and the CBR
plunger test (AS 3706.4-2001). The parameter used for classification is:
G = (h 50 L) 0.5
where
G = geotextile strength rating
h 50 = drop height (mm) required to make a puncture hole of 50 mm diameter (AS 3706.5-2000)
L = load (N) on CBR piston at geotextile failure (AS 3706.4-2001).
Other measures that can be used to define survivability include grab strength, seam strength, puncture
strength, trapezoidal tear strength, wide strip strength and elongation. Example requirements for geotextile
filters are given in Table 5.8.
Table 5.8: Geotextile – example physical properties

Figure 5.11: Geotextile being used as a first-stage filter
Note: Bedding should be placed beneath the pipe

Step F6 – Determine durability criteria
Geotextile filters are manufactured from synthetic fibres of long chain polymers such as polyethylene,
polyester or polypropylene. As all synthetic materials are subject to degradation, geotextile filters should be
treated carefully and protected from damage.
Questions about the durability of geotextiles generally relate to their degradation under the influence of
ultraviolet light, creep under stress, and mechanical damage during transport and installation. Other factors
which could influence the performance of a filter in the longer term are biological clogging by bacteria, algae
and mosses or chemical precipitation of ferrous or carbonate compounds.
Physical degradation
The resistance to degradation by light and heat can be evaluated according to AS 3706.11-2004. The
procedures to assess any loss of geotextile strength because of degradation by hydrocarbons or chemical or
microbiological activity are covered by AS 3706.12-2001 and AS 3706.13-2000. However, the effect of
microbiological and chemical activity on clogging is still under investigation.
Biological clogging
Bacteria carried with polluted seepage water tend to attach themselves to geotextile fibres (or soil particles in
a granular filter) and form a biofilm or bioslime which in turn absorbs additional inorganic and organic matter
from the percolating liquid.

In geotextile filters, bacteria can lead to up to an 80% loss of hydraulic conductivity and a four-fold increase
in the mass of a geotextile.
Biological clogging has also been known to affect long-term filtration tests by causing a decrease in the
system permeability. In such cases it is typical that large head losses also occur at the point of entrance of
the flow into the filter-soil, not just at the filter-soil geotextile interface.
Ochre clogging
Ochre clogging is caused by the transformation of iron (Fe++) in an aqueous solution to ferric hydroxide
which is non-soluble. This transformation occurs by the action of bacteria.
In drains, the iron hydroxide precipitation together with the bacteria form a rust coloured slimy mass which
together with entrapped granular material, can completely obstruct a drain. Remedies include sluicing and
chemical treatment.
Salt precipitation
Geotextiles can get clogged by incrustations due to the precipitation of carbonates and sulphates. This
process can occur where water containing dissolved salts evaporates in a soil/geotextile system which is
open to the atmosphere. The salt crystals formed may adhere to the fibres of the geotextile leading to partial
blocking of the filter if the drying period is long enough.
Additional guidance in the selection or specification of geotexiles is provided in the Guide to Pavement
Technology – Part 4G: Geotextiles and Geogrids (Austroads 2009a).
5.7 Selection of Pipe Size and Grade
5.7.1 Determining the Flow into the Pipe
Calculations of the type presented in Section 5.5 give a flow rate per unit length into the pipe thus the length
of subsurface drainage ‘run’ determines the required discharge capacity in cubic metres per second (m3/s).
5.7.2 Pipe Size and Slope
Having determined the flow into the pipe, the pipe size can be ascertained using Manning’s formula with
relevant values of slope and pipe roughness. The pipe size for pavement drains is normally 100 mm in
diameter. Additional pipes may be used to satisfy flow demands.

Manning’s formula is expressed as:

2 1
1
Q = A R 3S 2
n
where
Q = discharge (m 3 /s)
A = cross-sectional area of flow (m2)
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient
R = hydraulic radius of pipe (m)
= ¼ x pipe diameter assuming pipe half full
S = pipe slope (m/m)
Pipe slopes should generally have a minimum slope of 1 in 100, with an absolute minimum of 1 in 300. The
maximum slope should be governed by maximum flow velocities of 2 – 3 m/s. Values of Manning’s
roughness co-efficient are given in Table 5..
Table 5.9: Pipe roughness coefficients
Pipe characteristics Manning’s roughness coefficient ‘n’

Concrete or vitrified clay 0.011 – 0.013
Corrugated plastic 0.016
Smooth plastic 0.009
Corrugated metal 0.022 – 0.025
5.7.3 Pipe Permeability
Pipe permeability is determined by the size, arrangement and frequency of openings into the pipe. Openings
may be open joints between lengths of pipe or manufactured slots. Spalding (1970) gives a method of
determining whether the slot size and configuration in a particular type of pipe is adequate. However,
permeability will be sufficient for most applications if the total area of openings is 1500 mm 2/m length of pipe.
Any manufactured openings of small size should be cleanly cut. The maximum width of opening can be
selected or specified according to the type of filter material proposed, and for the standard granular filters
given in Section 5.6.2, a maximum slot width is specified. A knitted filter sock (second stage filter) around the
pipe will allow fine first stage granular filters to be used with pipes having wide slots since the filter is then
matched to the geotextile.
5.7.4 Pipe Stiffness and Strength
There are two basic strength characteristics for pipes – pipe stiffness and beam strength.
Almost all pipe testing is concerned with pipe stiffness, which is a measure of the ability to withstand live and
dead loads without crushing. The performance of a pipe in the field is also governed by the degree of lateral
trench support.

Pipes are available in a wide variety of brands and types with consequent differences in performance. Some
pipes, e.g. corrugated types, are manufactured specifically for subsurface drainage applications, whereas
others are manufactured for use as stormwater, sewer or pressure pipes and are later slotted for subsurface
drainage applications. Pipe stiffness is determined by a standard test applicable to the pipe material. For
ease of specification, stiffness levels may be classified to support different loads for trenches up to a given
width. Table 5. is an example classification system based on three stiffness levels for use in trenches up to
450 mm wide, laid carefully with properly compacted backfill and not subjected to loading by earthmoving
equipment.
Table 5.10: Pipe stiffness classifications
Category Pipe stiffness Typical use

(a) 200 kN/m2 Subsurface drains not subjected to loading by vehicles
(b) 400 kN/m2 Subsurface drains away from pavements and with a minimum cover of 700 mm
before being subjected to loading by highway vehicles of legal axle mass
(c) 1000 kN/m2 In or along the edges of pavements with a minimum cover of 500 mm before being
subjected to loading by highway vehicles of legal axle mass
In the example classification shown in Table 5., for pipes of 100 mm diameter, the 1000 kN/m2 stiffness
requirement can generally be met only by corrugated PVC pipe or by smooth slotted PVC Pressure pipe,
Class 12 minimum. For category (b) all of the above pipes are suitable, together with 100 mm diameter
corrugated polyethylene pipe and some classes of pressure pipe. Smooth slotted PVC sewer pipe, 100 mm
diameter is suitable for category (a) only.
Because it is desirable to control some of the other properties of plastic pipes, tests for low and high
temperature impact, bending, straightening and elongation are also performed.
Beam strength, although not a specified property, still warrants some consideration. Corrugated plastic pipes
have practically no beam stiffness, smooth plastic pipes have some, depending on their wall thickness, slot
width and configuration, whilst concrete pipes may act as very stiff beams. The type of pipe required on the
basis of beam strength should be chosen after consideration of the grade on which the pipe is to be laid and
the trench support beneath the pipe. For example, thick walled plastic pipes should be chosen for a
subsurface drainage system on flat grades in unconsolidated silts. These pipes are available in relatively
long lengths and will lessen the development of low spots due to differential settlement.
For ease of handling, corrugated plastic pipe which has been chilled after manufacture but before coiling
should be specified. This helps the pipe to lie flat in the trench before backfilling. Coils should be not less
than 1.5 m in diameter. Storage should be on a flat surface, with coils stacked not more than 1.5 m high and
away from daylight or wrapped in black polythene.
5.7.5 Prefabricated Geocomposite Fin Drains
Prefabricated geocomposite fin drains (PGFD), also known as geocomposite edge drains or geocomposite
fin drains, are proprietary products which can be used for pavement drainage purposes. They normally
comprise a plastic core and are wrapped in geotextile filter material. The thickness ranges from 25 mm to 40
mm and depth ranges from 200 mm to 900 mm.
As PGFDs have a larger surface area than a round pipe, they generally collect infiltrating water more quickly.
However the flow rate on discharge of PGFDs is generally lower than that of 100 mm round pipe. If the same
flow capacity is required of PGFDs, then outlets theoretically need to be spaced more frequently than for
standard 100 mm pipe drains or the drainage grade needs to be increased.

In the absence of detailed design standards for prefabricated geocomposite fin drains, it is recommended
that the cross-sectional area of the drain should not be less than 7500 mm² with a vertical dimension of not
less than 200 mm.
PGFDs are very difficult to unblock. In considering their use, risks associated with PGFDs becoming blocked
and the adverse impact on pavement performance should be considered. Consideration could be given to
using PGFDs in areas of relatively low flow where the consequences of blockage are minimal.

6. Construction and Maintenance Considerations
6.1 General
Construction of drainage systems is discussed in the Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 8: Pavement
Construction (Austroads 2009c) and maintenance of drainage systems is discussed in the Guide to
Pavement Technology – Part 7: Pavement Maintenance (Austroads 2009b). However, for the design of
subsurface drainage systems, several construction and maintenance considerations should be taken into
account including: design of inlets and outlets, maintenance access points and markers identifying the
location of subsurface drainage.
6.2 Design of Inlets and Outlets
6.2.1 Inlets
It will not be possible to maintain existing subsurface drainage systems if there is no access to the upstream
end of the pipeline. The need for maintenance should be considered in the design stage and inlets provided
where necessary. Openings in stormwater pits should be high enough to ensure that surface runoff will not
enter the pavement drainage pipe. Separate openings, where provided, should be located so as not to
interfere with other maintenance operations. They should not be located where surface runoff can enter.
6.2.2 Outlets
Where possible, subsurface drainage should outlet to permanent stormwater pits or concrete culvert
endwalls at a level above normal stormwater flow. Both systems can then be inspected at the one time.
Separate outlets should be located away from areas of siltation or scour.
A simple paved area should be provided around the outlet to prevent scour, growth of grass and to make the
outlet easy to find. The outlet pipe should consist of a smooth bore, unslotted pipe of sufficient strength to
bear maintenance plant.
6.3 Access Points
Maintenance access points should be located at the start of a pavement drain pipe-run and at intervals of
100 m to 140 m. These may consist of pits, risers or outlets. When connecting a pavement drainage system
into a stormwater system, the entry points should be not less than 100 mm above the invert level of the
stormwater pipe, and preferably much higher. This prevents the pavement drain pipe from silting up with
stormwater debris and avoids prolonged flooding of the pavement drainage system. Risers are usually
constructed by either bending flexible plastic pipe or preferably by use of a curved length of pipe or T-fittings.
If rigid pipes are specified then curved lengths of pipe or special T-fittings must be obtained. Usual practice
favours pits rather than risers. Pits and risers should not be located in unsealed shoulders, drain inverts or
on batter faces.
6.4 Markers
Marker pegs may be unpainted treated timber or painted. White paint should not be used, because of
possible confusion with guideposts. Round timber of 75 mm diameter with 600 mm of post above ground
level is recommended.

An identification plate can be attached to marker posts, if not already done during construction. In urban
areas, where pits require identification, a small plate could be attached to the pit lid using epoxy resin
adhesive.

References
Austroads 2008a, Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 4J: Aggregate and Source Rock, by B Vuong,
G Jameson and B Fielding, AGPT04J/08, Austroads, Sydney, NSW.
Austroads 2008b, Guide to Road Design – Part 5: Drainage Design, by A Armistead, A Woollard, D Bennett
& J Barff, AGRD05/08, Austroads, Sydney, NSW.
Austroads 2009a (forthcoming), Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 4G: Geotextiles and Geogrids,
Austroads, Sydney, NSW.
Austroads 2009b (forthcoming), Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 7: Pavement Maintenance,
Austroads 2009c (forthcoming), Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 8: Pavement Construction,
Cedergreen, HR 1974, Drainage of highways and airfield pavements, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Cedergreen, HR 1977, Seepage, drainage and flow nets, 2nd. edn, John Wiley & Sons, Sydney.
Emerson, WW 1967, ‘A classification of soil aggregates based on their coherence in water’, Australian Journal
of Soil Research, vol.5, no.1, pp. 47-57.
Fischer, GR, Christopher, BR & Holtz, RD 1990, 'Filter criteria based on pore size distribution'; International
conference on geotextiles, geomembranes and related products, 4th, 1990, The Hague, Netherlands,
Taylor and Francis, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp. 289-294.
Gerke, RJ 1987, Subsurface drainage of road structures, ARRB Special Report 35, ARRB Transport
Research, Vermont South.
Giroud, JP 1982, 'Filter criteria for geotextiles', International conference on geotextiles, 2nd, 1982, Las
Vegas, NV, pp. 103-8.
Haliburton, TA & Wood, PD 1982, 'Evaluation of the US Army Corps of Engineers gradient ratio test for
geotextile performance', International conference on geotextiles, 2nd, 1982, Las Vegas, NV, vol.1,
pp. 97-101.
Lawson, C 1986, ‘Geotextile filter criteria for tropical residual soils’, International conference on geotextiles, 3rd,
1986, Vienna, pp. 557-562.
Spalding, R 1970, Selection of materials for sub surface drains, LR 346, Road Research Laboratory,
Crowthorne, United Kingdom.
US Department of the Navy 1971, Design manual: soil mechanics, foundations and earth structures, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, VA.
VicRoads 2004a, Drainage of subsurface water from roads, Technical Bulletin No. 32, VicRoads, Kew, VIC
VicRoads 2004b, Road design guidelines, part 9, standard drawings for roadworks, VicRoads, Kew, VIC
Standards
ASTM International
ASTM D5101-01-2006, Standard test method for measuring the soil-geotextile system clogging potential by the
gradient ratio.
Standards Australia
AS 1141.11-1996, Methods of sampling and testing aggregates: Particle size distribution by sieving.
AS 1289.3.6.1-1995, Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes: Soil classification tests:
Determination of the particle size distribution of a soil: standard method of analysis by sieving.

AS 1289.3.8.1-2006, Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes: Soil classification tests: Dispersion:
Determination of Emerson class number of a soil.
AS 3706.4-2001, Geotextiles: Methods of test: Determination of burst strength: California bearing ratio
(CBR): Plunger method.
AS 3706.5-2000, Geotextiles: Methods of test: Determination of puncture resistance: Drop cone method.
AS3706.7-2003, Geotextiles: Methods of test: Determination of pore-size distribution: Dry-sieving method.
AS 3706.11-2004, Geotextiles: Dethods of test: Determination of durability: Resistance to degradation by
light, heat and moisture.
AS3706.12-2001, Geotextiles: Methods of test: Determination of durability: Resistance to degradation by
hydrocarbons or chemical reagents.
AS 3706.13-2000, Geotextiles: Methods of test: Determination of durability: Resistance to degradation by
certain microbiological agents.

Estimation of Permeability from Grading
This section should only be used for making a preliminary assessment of the adequacy of the proposed
drainage system if accurate soil permeability data is not available.
The saturated permeability of a non-cohesive granular material can generally be estimated by comparing its
grading with those shown in Figure A 1 and Figure A 2.
However, if there is a significant portion of fines passing the 75 μm sieve then the permeability for the
material can be determined from Figure A 3. Note that the type of fine material present is as significant as
the percentage of fines in determining the permeability of materials.
If the grading is not known but the type of materials is, then Figure A 4 may be used to estimate permeability.
Figure A 4 also accounts for variation of permeability with consolidation pressure for commonly occurring
subgrade materials.
When using permeability values for the design of subsurface drainage systems, the designer should always
be aware of the variability between similar materials. As shown in Figure A 5 the permeability of compacted
sandstone can vary in magnitude by 1000 fold. The lowest or highest value may be the correct design value.
The value used would be determined by whether the material was to be a water carrying or a water diverting
element of the system.
To be conservative in design, the lowest permeability result should be used for designing a water carrying
system and the highest result if the material is to act as a barrier in the system.
Figure A 1: Typical permeability rates of natural aggregates
Source: Adapted from Cedergreen (1974)

Figure A 2: Permeability versus grading
Source: Adapted from US Department of the Navy (1971)
Figure A 3: Effect of percentage passing 75 µm sieve on permeability of sands
Source: Adapted from US Department of the Navy (1971)

Figure A 4: Permeability versus consolidation pressure
Figure A 5: Permeability versus density for common road construction materials

Pavement Drain Design Example
Design parameters
• Rainfall event – 25 mm/hr (6.94 x 10-6 m/s).
• Two lane road with 3.75 m wide dense-graded asphalt traffic lanes and 1.5 m wide sprayed seal
shoulders.
• 300 mm thick granular pavement overlaying a 300 mm drainage layer.
• Flat grade with 3% one way crossfall.
• Pavement drain 100m long, consisting of a 450 mm wide trench with 100 mm diameter corrugated plastic
pipe on a 1% longitudinal grade to collect the seepage from the pavement only (no groundwater).
Step 1 – Estimation of flows of all sources of water into the structural elements of the road
1. Determine coefficient of permeability (infiltration rate) for traffic lanes and shoulders.
R max = 6.94 x 10-6 m/s
IC l = 0.3 (dense graded asphalt coefficient of permeability from Table 5.)
IC S = 0.2 (sprayed seal coefficient of permeability from Table 5.)
Using the equation provided in Section 5.3, calculate the coefficient of permeability (infiltration rate) for traffic
lanes and shoulders:
k = R max x IC
kl = 6.94 x 10-6 m/s x 0.3 = 2.08 x 10-6 m/s
ks = 6.94 x 10-6 m/s x 0.2 = 1.39 x 10-6 m/s
2. Determine total inflow or quantity of water entering pavement surface using the equation:
q = i (k lW l + k sW s)
= 1 x (2.08 x 10-6 x 7.5 + 1.39 x 10-6 x 3)
= 1.98 x 10-5 m3/s per m length of carriageway
Step 2 – Calculation of drainage layer permeability requirements
To ensure water entering the pavement flows vertically through to the drainage layer the permeability of the
granular pavement must be greater than the permeability of the surfacing. Therefore, the permeability of the
granular pavement needs to be greater than kl and ks.
kP ≥ k l and ≥ k s
≥ 2.08 x 10-6 m/s

To ensure that the drainage layer can satisfactorily remove the quantity of water infiltrating the pavement
(calculated in step 1), Darcy’s Law is used as described in Section 5.4.
q = kiA
where
i = 0.03 (slope of layer)
A = 1 x 0.3 (thickness of layer)
Rearranging Darcy’s Law gives:
k = q / (i x A)
= 1.98 x 10-5 / (0.03 x 0.3)
= 2.20 x 10-3 m/s
From Figure 5.3 an open graded granular pavement material would be required for the drainage layer.
Step 3 – Calculation of filter permeability and width of trench requirements
To ensure that the subsurface pavement drain can satisfactorily remove the quantity of water infiltrating the
pavement (calculated in step 1), the process described in Section 5.5 is used.
kf = q/W
= 1.98 x 10-5 / 0.45
= 4.40 x 10-5 m/s
From Figure 5.3 clean sand would be an adequate pavement drain filter material.
Step 4 – Checking compatibility of filters with soils and pipes
Appendix C contains an example of the application of the compatibility checking procedure described in
Table 5..
Step 5 – Selection of pipe size and grade
The total flow into the pipe is calculated by multiplying the quantity of water entering the pipe per linear m (q
from step 1) by the length of the pipe.
Q = 1.98 x 10-5 x 100
= 1.98 x 10-3 m3/s

The subsurface drainage pipe size and grade can then be calculated using Manning’s formula, as described
in Section 5.7.2. However, it is more common to check whether a standard pipe size and grade is
satisfactory for the expected discharge. In this case, using Manning’s formula:
Q = 1/n x r2/3 x S1/2
where
n = 0.16 (estimated using Table 5.)
r = 0.025 (1/4 x pipe diameter assuming pipe half full)
S = 0.01 (grade of subsurface drainage pipe)
Q = (1/0.16) x (0.025)2/3 x (0.01)1/2
= 0.5 m3/s
As the discharge rate is greater than the total flow into the pipe the pipe size and grade are satisfactory.
Typically, the pipe stiffness would also be checked by comparing the proposed pipe stiffness and anticipated
use with the maximum recommended pipe stiffness values of Table 5.10.

Figure B 1: Pavement drain example

PAVEMENT DRAINAGE EXAMPLE
Location Sydney Job number
Inflow from surface infiltration

Infiltration rate k = R x IC
R= 6.94 x 10-6 m/s Step 1 - Estimation of flows into the structural elements
IClane = 0.3 of the road
ICshoulder = 0.2
∴ kl = 2.08 x 10-6 m/s
∴ ks = 1.39 x 10-6 m/s
Volume of water entering pavement:

q = i(klW l x ksW s)
i= 1
Wl = 7.5 m
Ws = 3m
∴q= 1.98 x 10 m3/s per m length of carriageway
-5
Permeability of drainage layer

q = kiA
i= 0.03 Step 2 - Calculation of drainage layer permeability
A= 0.3 m2 requirements
q= 1.98 x 10-5 m3/s
∴k= 2.20 x 10-3 m/s
Drainage layer material (select from Figure 5.3):

An open graded granular material is required for the drainage layer.
Required filter permeability and width of trench

q = kiA
i= 1 Step 3 - Calculation of filter permeability and width of
A= 0.45 m2 trench requirements
q= 1.98 x 10-5 m3/s
∴k= 4.40 x 10-5 m/s
Filter material (select from Figure 5.3):

An adequate filter material would be a clean (washed) sand
Compatibility of filters with soils and pipes

Refer to Appendix C for example. Step 4 - Check compatibility of filters with soils and pipes
Selection of pipe size and grade

q= 1.98 x 10-5 m3/s
L= 100 m Step 5 - Selection of pipe size and grade
∴Q= 1.98 x 10-3 m3/s
Q = 1/n x r2/3 x S1/2

n= 0.016
r= 0.025 m
S= 0.01 m/m
∴Q= 3
0.5 m /s

Granular filter Design example
The following example illustrates step 4 of the subsurface pavement drain design procedure described in
Section 5.2 and follows the granular filter design steps described in Section 5.6.2. A summary worksheet for
this example is provided as Figure C 3.
Design parameters
• The in situ material to be drained is a silty sand with the grading as shown in Figure C 1.
• It is proposed to use a 100 mm diameter slotted plastic pipe with slot width of 1.2 mm.
Step G1 – Description of in situ material
The in situ material to be drained is a silty sand.
Step G2 – Grading analysis of in situ material
Figure C 1: Parent soil grading
Step G3 – Plot grading of in situ material
The particle size distribution of the in situ material determined in step 2 is plotted as Figure C 2.

Figure C 2: Parent soil grading
Step G4 – Determine particle size characteristics (D10 S, D15 S, D50 S, D60 S, D85 S and D100 S)
From Figure C 2 the particle size characteristics are read off as:
• D10 S = 55 µm
• D15 S = 82 µm
• D50 S = 425 µm
• D60 S = 600 µm
• D85 S = 1500 µm
• D100 S = 3500 µm
Step G5 – Calculate Coefficient of Uniformity, U S

• US = D60 S / D10 S
= 600 / 55
= 10.9
Step G6 – Calculate filter criteria

• D15 F ≤ 4 x D85 S
≤ 4 x 1500 µm
≤ 6000 µm

• D50 F ≤ 9.5 x D50 S (as U S ≤ 15)

≤ 9.5 x 425
≤ 4038 µm
• D15 F ≥ 5 x D15 S
≥ 5 x 82
≥ 410 µm
• D100 F ≤ 10 mm
• D85 F ≥ 3 x Width of slots (pipe) or D85 F ≥ 3 x Maximum opening (filter sock)
• D85 F ≥ 3 x 1.2 mm
• D85 F ≥ 3600 µm
Step G7 – Plot filter criteria to give grading limits of filter material
Refer Figure 5.5 for an example plot showing filter criteria to give grading limits of filter material.
Step G8 – Select filter material
Refer Figure 5.6 for an example plot showing selection of a suitable filter material grading.
Step G9 – Eliminate segregation of filter by limiting the Coefficient of Uniformity (UF)
The Coefficient of Uniformity of the proposed filter material can be calculated as shown in step G5.

Figure C 3: Granular filter material design example

GRANULAR FILTER EXAMPLE
Location Sydney Job number
Soil Description Silty sand Step G1 - Description of in situ material
Grading
A.S.Sieve size (mm) 53 37.5 26.5 19 13.2 9.5 4.75 2.36 1.18 0.6 0.3 0.15 0.075
% passing by mass 100 92 78 60 39 25 14
Step G2 - Grading analysis of in situ material
Step G3 - Plot the grading of in situ material
Characteristic sizes D10S D15S D50S D60S D85S D100S Step G4 - Determine particle size characteristics
from grading curve (µm) 55 82 425 600 1500 3500
US = D60S/D10S US = 10.9 µm Step 5 - Calculate uniformity coefficient US
D15F ≤ 4 x D85S D15F ≤ 6,000 µm Step G6 - Calculate filter criteria
D50F ≤ 9.5 x D50S, US ≤ 15 OR D50F ≤ 13.5 x D50S, US > 15

D15F ≤ 4,038 µm OR 5,738 µm Step G7 - Plot filter criteria to give grading limits for filter
material
D15F ≥ 5 x D15S D15F ≥ 410 µm
D100F ≤ 10mm D100F ≤ 10,000 µm
D85F ≥ 3 x Width of slots (pipe) OR D85F ≥ 3 x Maximum opening (filter sock)

Width of slots 1.2
Maximum opening 0.0
D85F ≥ 3.6 µm OR 0 µm
Step G8 - Select filter material
Proposed filter material which meets filter criteria from Step G6

A.S.Sieve size (mm) 53 37.5 26.5 19 13.2 9.5 4.75 2.36 1.18 0.6 0.3 0.15 0.075
% passing by mass 100 97 80 54 32 16 6 2 1
From grading curve D60F = 2.9 mm

of proposed filter D10F = 0.42 mm Step G9 - Eliminate segregation of filter by limiting the
Coefficient of Uniformity (UF ≤ 5)
CUF = D60F/D10F 6.90

AGPT10-09 Guide To Pavement Technology Part 10 Subsurface Drainage

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

AGPT10-09 Guide To Pavement Technology Part 10 Subsurface Drainage

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guide to Guide to Pavement Technology Part 10:

2. Moisture Ingress and Drainage Systems ............................................................................................. 3

3. Types and Uses of Subsurface Pavement Drains............................................................................... 8

4. Site Investigation and Assessment for Subsurface Drainage .........................................................17

5. Design of Subsurface pavement drains ............................................................................................. 20

Austroads 2009 | page i

5.7.4 Pipe Stiffness and Strength ...................................................................................................... 42

6. Construction and Maintenance Considerations ............................................................................... 45

Appendix A Estimation of Permeability from Grading ............................................................................. 49

Appendix B Pavement Drain Design Example .......................................................................................... 52

Appendix C Granular filter Design example .............................................................................................. 56

Austroads 2009 | page ii

1.1 Guide to Pavement Technology

Austroads 2009 | page 1

1.2 Scope of Part 10 of the Guide to Pavement Technology

This Part contains brief descriptions of the topics listed below:

Austroads 2009 | page 2

2. Moisture Ingress and Drainage Systems

2.2 Sources of Moisture Ingress

Figure 2.1: Sources of moisture

Source: Gerke (1987)

Austroads 2009 | page 3

Figure 2.2: Infiltration of water via the surface

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

Figure 2.3: Infiltration of water though shoulders/verge

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

Austroads 2009 | page 4

Figure 2.4: Infiltration of water via the subgrade

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

2.3 Types of Drainage Systems

There are three broad types of drainage systems:

2.3.1 Surface Drainage

Figure 2.5: Schematic of surface drainage

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

Austroads 2009 | page 5

2.3.2 Subsurface Drainage

Subsurface pavement drains

Figure 2.6: Typical pavement drain

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

Further details on subsurface pavement drains are given in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6.

Subsurface formation drains

Austroads 2009 | page 6

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

2.3.3 Drainage Blankets

Austroads 2009 | page 7

3. Types and Uses of Subsurface Pavement Drains

3.1 Types of Subsurface Pavement Drains

Figure 3.1: Examples of subsurface pavement drain types

Source: VicRoads (2004b)

Austroads 2009 | page 8

Figure 3.2: Example transverse pavement drain cross-sections

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

Austroads 2009 | page 9

3.2 Selection of Pavement Drain Type and Filter Type

Permeability Type of pavement Filter material (refer

Figure 3.3: Examples of unsatisfactory pavement drainage

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

Austroads 2009 | page 10

Figure 3.4: Examples of satisfactory pavement drainage

Source: VicRoads (2004a)

Austroads 2009 | page 11

3.3 Location of Pavement Drains

Longitudinal pavement drains: