Corrigendum 2 With Annexures

No. RW/NH-12014/02/2019/RAJ/PKG.
II/EAP
Government of India
Ministry of Road Transport & Highways
(EAP Zone)
Transport Bhawan, 1, Parliament Street, New Delhi – 110001
Dated: 28th January, 2020
Corrigendum – 2
to
REQUEST FOR BIDS (RFB)
for
Rehabilitation and Upgradation to 2-lane with paved Shouders configuration of

Beawar-Asind Section (km 30.000 to km 74.000) of NH-158 in the State of
Rajasthan under Green National Highways Corridor Project (GNHCP) with the
loan assistance of World Bank on EPC mode.
1. Add point no. (iv) of Cl. 1.1 of Section-III of RFB as following:
“Bidder shall submit an undertaking/compliance of the following in respect of

EHS:
(a) Details of Contracting Entity’s HSE policy, manual and HSE
plan/procedures.
(b) Affidavit stating that no penalties/fines or penal action has been taken
on the company/its staff/works that they have been engaged in by any
regulatory body (Courts/CRZ Authority/Forest and Environment
Department/Pollution Control Board/National Green Tribunal/Department
of Labour or any such regulatory or legal entity).
(c) Undertaking stating that EHS performance of Company has been
‘satisfactory’ and no monetary ‘deduction/retention’ was made on account
of HSE non-compliance in last 5 years.
2. Cl. no. 4.2 (a) of Eligibility and Qualification Criteria of RFB shall be read as:
Joint Venture (existing or intended)

No Subject Requirement Single where permitted Submission
. Entity All Each At least one Requiremen
members Member Member
Combined ts
4.1 General Experience under Must N/A Must Must meet Form EXP –
(a) Construction construction contracts in meet meet 50%, (fifty 4.1
Experience the role of prime requir 25%, percent) of the
contractor, JV member, ement (twenty requirement
five
subcontractor, or
percent)
management contractor of the
for the period from require
Page 1 of 4
Combined ts
01.04.2014 to ment
31.03.2019.
The firm should have the
Technical Capacity more
than the Threshold
Technical Capacity which
is equal to 1.5 times the
estimated contract value
of the project.
For demonstrating
technical capacity and
experience (the
“Technical Capacity”),
the Bidder shall, over the
period from 01.04.2014 to
31.03.2019, have
received payments for
construction of Eligible
Project(s)1 in any mode of
execution like Item rate,
EPC, PPP2 etc., such that
the sum total thereof, as
further adjusted in
accordance with the
weightage factor of 1.0
for Highways Sector and
0.70 for Core Sector, is
more than Rs. 258
crores (Rs. Two
Hundred and Fifty-
Eight crore) (updated
to the price level of the
year at the rate of 5% per
year) (the “Threshold
Technical Capacity”).
The description of works

under Highways Sector
and Core Sector is
described as below:
1
For all other projects:
the capital cost of the project should be more than 10% of the amount specified as the Estimated Project Cost.
2
For the Project considering under PPP:
(a) the entity claiming experience should have held, in the company owning the Eligible Project, a minimum of
26% (twenty-six per cent) equity during the entire year for which Eligible Experience is being claimed;
(b)the entity claiming experience shall, during the last 5 (five) financial years preceding the Bid Due Date, have
itself undertaken the construction of the project for an amount equal to at least one half of the Project Cost of
eligible projects, excluding any part of the project for which any contractor, sub-contractor or other agent was
appointed for the purposes of construction
Page 2 of 4
Combined ts
(a) Highways
Sector (Weightage
Factor of 1.0) - would be
deemed to include
highways, expressways,
bridges, tunnels,
runways, railways
(construction/re-
construction of railway
tracks, yards for keeping
containers etc.) metro rail
and ports (including
construction/re-
construction cost of
Jetties, any other linear
infrastructure including
bridges etc.); and
(b) Core Sector

(Weightage Factor of
0.70): would be deemed
to include civil
power sector, commercial
setups (SEZs etc.),
airports, industrial parks/
estates, logistic parks,
pipelines, irrigation, water
supply, sewerage and
real estate development.
4.2 Specific (i) A minimum number of Must NA NA Must meet Form EXP
(a) Construction meet 4.2(a)
one similar contract the
& Contract requir
Management
specified below that has ement
requirement
Experience been satisfactorily and
substantially3 completed
as a prime contractor,
joint venture member4,
management contractor
or sub-contractor5
between 1st April 2015
and bid submission
deadline:
3
Substantial completion shall be based on 90% or more works completed under the contract.
4
For contracts under which the Bidder participated as a joint venture member or sub-contractor, only the
Bidder’s share, by value, shall be considered to meet this requirement
5
For contracts under which the Bidder participated as a joint venture member or sub-contractor, only the
Bidder’s share, by value, shall be considered to meet this requirement
Page 3 of 4
Combined ts
(i) One contract of
minimum value Rs. 70
crore (Rs. Seventy
Crore) (updated to the
price level of the year at
the rate of 5% per year);
The similarity of the
contracts shall be based
on the following: The
similar work shall be from
the following categories
of works: highways,
expressways, bridges,
tunnels, runways,
railways (construction/re-
construction of railway
tracks, yards for keeping
containers etc.) metro rail
and ports (including
construction/re-
Jetties, any other linear
infrastructure including
bridges etc.)
4.2 Specific
(d) Experience
Deleted.
in managing
ES aspects
3. A revised Schedule-B is placed at Annexure-I.

4. Main Report is placed at Annexure-II.
5. Geotechnical Report is placed at Annexure-III.
6. Structure & Miscellaneous Drawing Volume is placed at Annexure-IV.
Page 4 of 4
ANNEXURE-I
SCHEDULE - B
(See Clause 2.1)
Development of the Project Highway
1 Development of the Project Highway
Development of the Project Highway shall include design and construction of the Project Highway
as described in this Schedule-B and in Schedule-C.
2 Rehabilitation and augmentation
Rehabilitation and augmentation shall include two laning and strengthening of the Project
Highway as described in Annex-I of this Schedule-B and in Schedule-C.
3 Specifications and Standards
The Project Highway shall be designed and constructed in conformity with the Specifications and
Standards specified in Annex-I of Schedule-D.
Annex - I
(Schedule-B)
Description of Two-Laning
1 WIDENING OF THE EXISTING HIGHWAY
1.1 The Project Highway shall follow the existing alignment unless otherwise specified by the
Authority and shown in the alignment plans specified in Annex III of Schedule-A.
Geometric deficiencies, if any, in the existing horizontal and vertical profiles shall be
corrected as per the prescribed standards for [Plain/Rolling] terrain to the extent land is
available.
1.2 WIDTH OF CARRIAGEWAY
1.2.1 The paved carriageway shall be 10 meters wide including the paved shoulders except
following sections.
Carriageway Paved
Design Chainage (m) Name of Village TCS Type
(m) Shoulder (m)
37+300 37+600 Pipali Bariya 9 7 2.5
39+650 39+900 Jaswantpura 8 7 2.5
45+600 45+850 Hira Bariya 9 7 2.5
54+100 54+730 Mavla 9 7 2.5
60+600 61+000 Badnor 15 7 2.5
68+820 70+000 Para 9 7 2.5
70+850 71+550 Gopalpura 15 7 2.5
72+800 73+520 Asind 15 7 2.5
1.2.2 Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the width of the paved carriageway and
cross-sectional features shall conform to paragraph 1.2.1 above.
2 GEOMETRIC DESIGN AND GENERAL FEATURES
2.1 General
Geometric design and general features of the Project Highway shall be in accordance with IRC:
SP:73-2018 (Two Lane Manual) as specified in Schedule D.
2.2 Design Speed
The design speed shall be the minimum design speed 100/80 kmph for Plain terrain in
accordance with ROW. At the following locations, design speed is restricted as given below.
EPC Package 2
SR. Design Chainage (m)
Speed
No. Length (m) Remarks
From To (kmph)
1 40+500 43+000 40 2500 Forest
2.3 Improvement of the existing road geometrics
As per alignment in Plan and Profile enclosed, where improvement of the existing road
geometrics to the prescribed standards is not possible, the existing road geometrics shall
be improved to the extent possible within the given right of way and proper road signs
and safety measures shall be provided.
Realignments
Design Chainage
Sl. No Length
From To
1 30+650 33+500 2850
2 33+775 34+254 479
3 34+342 34+613 271
4 35+365 35+800 435
5 36+045 37+100 1055
6 38+511 39+057 546
7 39+134 39+500 366
8 43+000 44+000 1000
9 44+300 45+000 700
10 45+740 46+514 774
11 47+030 48+630 1600
12 49+600 50+600 1000
13 53+900 55+220 1320
14 56+400 56+740 340
15 57+000 57+220 220
16 57+950 59+770 1820
17 60+710 61+000 290
18 64+500 64+820 320
19 65+850 66+150 300
2.4 Right of Way
Right of way for the project stretch is 30 m except the locations mentioned below:
Design Chainage Proposed Row

Sl. No Length (m) Remarks
From To LHS RHS
1 39+300 39+650 350 22 22 Toll Plaza
2 60+880 61+120 240 25 15 Truck Lay bye
3 67+600 67+800 200 15 100 Way Side Amenities
2.5 Type of shoulders
(a) In built-up sections, footpaths/fully paved shoulders shall be provided as per TCS
schedule given in Table 2.11 of Annexure I of Schedule B.
(b) Design and specifications of paved shoulders shall conform to the requirements
specified in paragraphs 5.10 of the Manual.
2.6 Lateral and vertical clearances at underpasses
2.6.1 Lateral and vertical clearances at Vehicle underpasses and provision of guardrails/crash
barriers shall be as per Section 2.10 of the Manual.
2.6.2 Lateral clearance: The width of the opening at the underpasses shall be as follows:
Nil
2.7 Lateral and vertical clearances at overpasses
2.7.1 Lateral and vertical clearances at overpasses shall be as Section 2.11 of the Manual.
2.7.2 Lateral clearance: The width of the opening at the overpasses shall be as follows:
Nil
2.8 Service roads & Slip Roads
Service Road/ Slip roads shall be provided at locations given in below table:
Location of Service Right Hand

Roads (Design Chainage Side Width of
Sl. Length of Service
in Km) (RHS)/Left Service Road
No. Roads (km)
Hand Side) or (m)
From To
Both Sides
1 60+250 61+350 Both 1.1 5.5
2 70+850 71+400 Both 0.55 5.5
3 71+400 71+550 Both 0.15 5.5
4 72+600 73+600 Both 1.0 5.5
2.9 Grade separated structures
2.9.1 List of Vehicular underpass
NIL
2.9.2 List of Vehicular underpass grade-II
Design Improvement Proposal Vertical

Width
Sl. No Chainage Span clearance
Proposal (m)
(Km) arrangement (m) (m)
1 60+810 New construction 1x12 4 13
2.9.3 Cattle and pedestrian underpass /overpass
Nil
2.10 Typical cross-sections of the Project Highway
Different type of cross sections for different segments of Two lane with paved shoulders stretch
shall be developed as provided in IRC SP-73 2018 referred in Schedule D.
Indicative Typical Cross sections are as below.
Sl. Design Chainage (m)

Design Length (m) TCS Type Remarks
No From To
1 30+050 30+650 600 8
2 30+650 31+670 1020 10 Forest
3 31+670 31+800 130 11 Forest
4 31+800 36+050 4250 8 Forest
5 36+050 37+100 1050 10
6 37+100 37+300 200 8
7 37+300 37+600 300 9
8 37+600 39+300 1700 8
9 39+300 39+650 350 Toll Plaza
10 39+650 39+700 50 8
11 39+700 40+000 300 9
12 40+000 40+600 600 8
13 40+600 40+800 200 12
14 40+800 41+800 1000 8
15 41+800 41+960 160 11
16 41+960 43+000 1040 8
17 43+000 43+480 480 10
18 43+480 43+600 120 11
19 43+600 44+000 400 10
20 44+000 45+600 1600 8
21 45+600 45+850 250 9
22 45+850 47+000 1150 8
23 47+000 48+630 1630 10
24 48+630 49+600 970 8
25 49+600 49+800 200 10
26 49+800 50+060 260 11
27 50+060 50+700 640 10
28 50+700 54+100 3400 8
29 54+100 54+730 630 9
30 54+730 59+770 5040 10
31 59+770 60+250 480 8
32 60+250 61+350 1100 15 VUP-II
33 61+350 68+820 7470 8
34 68+820 70+000 1180 9
35 70+000 70+020 20 8
36 70+020 70+850 830 10
Service road with at
37 70+850 71+400 550 15
grade separator
No From To
38 71+400 71+550 150 15 VUP-II
39 71+550 71+685 135 10
40 71+685 71+835 150 13 Major Bridge
41 71+835 72+600 765 9
42 72+600 73+600 1000 15 VUP-II
Annexure-I
Typical Cross Section Type 8
*NOTE: TCS 8 also applicable in forest section with Proposed ROW 15m.



Embankment (Height More Then 3m) With Core Of Fly Ash for Two Lane Road with Paved Shoulder (New Construction)
Embankment (Height More Then 3m) With Core Of Fly Ash for Two Lane VUP/ROB Approach with Retaining Structure
2.11 INTERSECTIONS AND GRADE SEPARATORS
All intersections and grade separators shall be as per Section 3 of the Manual. Existing
intersections which are deficient shall be improved to the prescribed standards.
Properly designed intersections shall be provided at the locations and of the types and
features given in the tables below:
(a) Major Intersections
Type of
Sl. No. Design Chainage (km) Leads to Left Leads to Right
Junction
1 30+800 T - Rajiyawas
2 33+433 T - Rajiyawas
3 43+238 T - Hirabariya
4 43+865 T - Hirabariya
5 47+158 T - Kaniyakhera
6 47+900 T - Kotra
7 49+770 T Ojiyana -
8 50+426 T Ojiyana -
9 58+670 T - Badnor
10 59+670 T - Badnor
New Parsoli New Parsoli
11 67+950 +
realignment realignment
12 67+950 T
13 70+225 T Asind
14 72+532 T Asind
Note:
The contractor shall take up ‘Detailed Engineering study’ to ascertain further details of all intersections and treatment of
the intersections shall be designed in accordance with the latest guidelines mentioned out in section-3 of Manual.
(b) Minor Intersections: -
In addition to the above listed Major intersections, other minor intersections consisting of Earthen
road, BT road etc. which are not listed above shall also be considered for minor improvements.
These intersections shall be re-graded to match with the Edge of the Main Carriageway with due
regard to physical conditions of the site available and within the PROW. The entire cross roads shall
be connected to the highway through properly designed entry and exit curves. The minimum values
for the entry and exit curves of cross roads shall be as per Section 3.2.2 of the Manual.
Sl. Design Chainage Type of

Leads to Left Leads to Right
No. (km) Junction
1 31+640 + Gohana Rajiyawas
2 32+735 T Gohana
3 32+900 Y Rajiyawas
4 34+360 + Rayta Khera Rajiyawas
5 35+277 + Shahpura Shahpura
6 36+021 T Suradiya
Sl. Design Chainage Type of
Leads to Left Leads to Right
No. (km) Junction
7 36+530 Y Peepli Ka Wadiya
8 36+790 T Suradiya
9 38+331 T Patta Khera
10 39+048 T Akhegarh
11 40+400 T Shekhawas
12 42+615 T Shekhawas
13 44+740 T Chatarpura
14 45+000 T Bar
15 45+100 T Chatarpura
16 45+740 T Bar
17 45+815 + Amarpura Amarpura
18 46+485 + Amarpura Amarpura
19 48+258 T Bhairoopura
20 48+550 T Bhairoopura
21 49+235 T Laxmipura at Kotra
22 52+460 + Mothi Singhpura
23 53+900 Y
24 55+000 Y
25 56+270 T Mogar
26 56+400 T Akarsada
27 58+800 + Jaisinghpura Badnor
28 60+789 Y Badhor
29 61+476 T Kolpura
30 62+620 T Jhadoo Ka Khera
31 62+875 T Badhor
32 63+965 T Gayatri Nagar
33 66+545 + Pura Bajunda
34 68+798 T Ajeetpura
35 68+888 T Pratappura
38 70+870 T Asind
39 70+980 T Asind
40 71+045 T Asind
41 71+185 + Asind Asind
42 71+360 T Asind
43 71+430 T Asind
44 71+540 + Asind Asind
45 71+830 + Keriya Khera Asind
46 73+002 T Chunginaka
48 73+300 + Chunginaka Chunginaka
2.12 ROAD EMBANKMENT AND CUT SECTION
2.12.1 Widening and improvement of the existing road embankment/cuttings and construction of
new road embankment/ cuttings shall conform to the Specifications and Standards given
in Section 4 of the Manual and the specified cross-sectional details. Deficiencies in the plan
and profile of the existing road shall be corrected.
2.12.2 Raising of the existing road: Nil
3 PAVEMENT DESIGN
Pavement design shall be carried out in accordance with Section 5 of the Manual IRC SP-73-2018.
No stage Construction shall be permitted. Flexible pavement design shall be carried out in
accordance with IRC-37-2018 and rigid pavement shall be carried out in accordance with IRC-58-
2015.
The existing project road has conventional pavement layers hence, the pavement design of project
road sections where widening of existing road is proposed shall be designed with conventional
pavement layers as per IRC-37.
The new pavement in the realignment and bypass sections shall be designed considering minimum
aggregate requirements in pavement layers by using Cement Treated Sub base (CTSB) or Alternate
methodology as per site. The realignment sections are as below:
Sl. Design Chainage Length Village

No From To
1 30+650 33+500 2850 Rajiyawas
2 33+775 34+254 479
3 34+342 34+613 271
4 35+365 35+800 435
5 36+045 37+100 1055 Pipali Bariya
6 38+511 39+057 546
7 39+134 39+500 366
8 43+000 44+000 1000 Hira Bariya
9 44+300 45+000 700
10 45+740 46+514 774
11 47+030 48+630 1600 Kaniyakhera & Kotra
12 49+600 50+600 1000 Ojiyana
13 54+094 54+250 156
14 56+400 56+740 340
15 57+000 57+220 220
16 57+950 59+770 1820 Badnor
17 60+710 61+000 290
18 64+500 64+820 320
19 65+850 66+150 300
20 70+020 72+625 2605 Asind
Total 17127
3.1 Type of pavement
Strengthening and widening of the existing carriageway shall be with flexible pavement and
rigid pavement shall be provided at, Toll plazas and Truck lay byes.
Design Chainage (m)

Sl. No Design Length (m) Remarks
From To
1 39+300 39+650 350 Toll Plaza
2 61+800 62+040 240 Truck Lay bye
3.2 Design requirements
As per Section 5 of the Manual
3.3 Design Period and strategy
Flexible pavement for new pavement or for widening and strengthening of the existing
pavement shall be designed for a minimum design period of 15 years. Stage construction
shall not be permitted. Rigid pavement shall be designed for 30 years.
3.4 Design Traffic and Pavement Design
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement or the Manual, the
Contractor shall design the pavement for design traffic of not less than the following.
Design CBR = 6%
Pavement Composition
HS-II30 to 60.800 HS-III 60.800 to 74.000
Design MSA 30 30
List of reconstruction stretches are given below.
Design Chainage (m)

Sl. No Design Length (m)
From To
1 30+050 30+650 600
2 31+670 31+800 130
3 33+500 36+050 2550
4 37+100 43+000 5900
5 43+480 43+600 120
6 44+000 47+000 3000
7 48+630 49+600 970
8 49+800 50+060 260
9 50+700 58+650 7950
10 59+770 60+250 480
11 61+350 70+020 8670
12 71+835 72+600 765
13 73+600 73+720 120
14 73+970 74+000 30
4 ROADSIDE DRAINAGE
Drainage system including surface and subsurface drains for the Project Highway shall be provided
as per Section 6 of IRC SP-73-2018. Locations of RCC road side drains shall be as per Cross Section
Schedule.
5 DESIGN OF STRUCTURES
5.1 General
5.1.1 All bridges, culverts and structures shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
section 7 of the Manual and shall conform to the cross-sectional features and other details
specified therein.
5.1.2 Width of the carriageway of new bridges and structures shall be in accordance with
specifications and standards provided in IRC SP-73 2018 unless specified in this Schedule.
5.1.3 All bridges shall be high-level bridges.
5.1.4 All new Bridges shall have provisions for utility services to be carried over.
5.1.5 Cross-section of the new culverts and bridges at deck level for the Project Highway shall
confirm to the typical cross-sections given in section 7 of the IRC SP-73-2018.
5.2 Culverts
5.2.1 Overall width of all culverts shall be equal to the roadway width of the approaches.
5.2.2 All the Box Culverts to be constructed shall be Pre Cast.
5.2.3 Improvement Proposal for Culverts shall be given below:
(i) Improvement proposal with box culverts:
Existing Structure Type Improvement Proposal

Existing Design
Sl
Chainage Chainage Span
No. Type No Span/Dia Proposal Type
(Km) (Km) Arrangement
1 102+185 31+841 Slab 1 1.900 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2x2

2 101+885 32+140 Pipe 1 0.600 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2x2
3 101+801 32+223 Slab 1 2.000 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2x2
6 101+220 32+802 Slab 1 4.000 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x4x3.0
7 100.286 33+467 Rcc Solid Slab 1 3.5 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x3.0x3.0
8 100.130 33+625 Pipe 2 1.6 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x3x2.0
Existing Structure Type Improvement Proposal
Existing Design
Sl
No. Type No Span/Dia Proposal Type
12 97.092 36+242 Pipe 1 0.5 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2.0x2.0
14 90.764 41+458 Rcc Solid Slab 2 2.0 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2x2.0
15 90.270 41+952 Pipe 2 0.9 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2.0x2.0
16 89.038 43+077 Pipe 1 0.5 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2x2
17 88.891 43+147 Rcc Solid Slab 2 1.5 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1X3.0X2.0
(ii) Repair and widening of the slab culvert
Sl No. Existing Structure Type Improvement Proposal

Existing Design
Span
Chainage Chainage No Span/Dia Type Proposal Type
Arrangement
(Km) (Km)
Repair &
1 92.857 39+565 1 2.2 Slab Culvert BC 1x2.2
Widen
Repair &
2 75.583 56+283 1 1 Slab Culvert BC 1x1.5
Widen
Repair &
3 59.168 68+820 1 3 Slab Culvert BC 1x3.0
Widen
Improvement proposal for Pipe Culverts:
(i) Culverts to be reconstructed
Existing Design Existing Structure Type Improvement Proposal

Sl No. Chainage Chainage Span
No Span/Dia Type Proposal Type
1 103.500 30+118 1 0.9 Pipe Reconstruction PC 1x1.2
Slab
4 89.568 42+552 2 1 Reconstruction PC 1x1.2
Culvert
22 76.298 55+570 1 0.6 pipe Reconstruction PC 1x1.2
Sl No. Chainage Chainage Span
No Span/Dia Type Proposal Type
Slab
39 64.980 66+087 1 0.6 Reconstruction PC 1x1.2
Culvert
(ii) Culverts to be repair and widen

Sl
No. No Span/Dia Type Proposal Type
1 85.390 46+720 1 1.2 Pipe Repair & Widen PC 1x1.2
2 75.049 56+817 1 0.9 pipe Repair & Widen PC 1x0.9
(iii) Additional Culverts shall be provided as per details given below.
Design
Sl. No. Proposal Type Span (m)
Chainage (km)
1 31+300 New Construction BC 1x4x3.0
3 31+490 New Construction BC 1x1.5x3.0
Design
Chainage (km)
17 59+502 New Construction BC 1x5.8x2
(iv) Culverts to be retained
Nil
Note: In addition, pipe culverts of 1x1.2m dia shall be provided on cross roads at all major and minor
junctions for drainage purpose.
5.2.4 Repairs/replacements of railing/parapets, flooring and protection works of the existing

culverts shall be undertaken as follows:
All Repairs shall be carried out as per present site conditions. The repair works to be carried out as
per IRC standards and in consultation with Authority’s Engineer and NHAI, the repair requirements
to be assessed at the time of construction for actual requirements.
5.2.5 Floor protection works shall be as specified in the relevant IRC Codes and Specifications.
5.3 Bridges
5.3.1 Existing bridges to be reconstructed/widened
Details of new major bridges and Reconstruction Scheme for Existing Major Bridges
(i) New Major Bridges
Proposed Structure
Existing Structure Details
Existing Details
Sl. Design Chainage Improvement
Chainage Span
No (km) Span / Width Proposal
(km) Type Width (C/C of Type
Length (m)
exp.)
PSC New
1 - 71+760 - - - 5x30 16
Girder Construction
* Skew span
Details of new Minor Bridges and Rehabilitation/Repair / Widening Scheme for Existing Minor
Bridges
(ii) Construction of New Minor Bridges
Existing Structure Details Proposed Structure Details

Existing Design
Sl. Improvement
No Span / Proposal
(km) (km) Type Width (C/C of Width (m) Type
Length
exp.)
RCC New
1 - 46+072 - - - 3x18.0 16
Girder Construction
(iii) Reconstruction of Minor Bridges
Existing Design Existing Structure Details Proposed Structure Details

Sl. Improvement
Chainage Chainage
No Proposal
(km) (km) Span/ Width Span (C/C of Width
Type Type
Length (m) exp.) (m)
2x4.5 (Clear
1 79.338 52+527 RCC Slab 3x2.8 12 16 RCC Box Re-Construction
span)
2x4.5 (Clear
2 79.210 52+655 RCC Slab 3x2.9 12 16 RCC Box Re-Construction
span)
3x5.0 (Clear
3 78.296 53+578 RCC Slab 5x2.9 12.2 16 RCC Box Re-Construction
span)
Note : The proposed length is tentative and the same shall be finalized in consultation with Authority’s Engineer, Any change in total
length and span arrangement shall be deemed to be covered within the scope of work.
5.3.2 The railings of all existing bridges (to be repair/widened) shall be replaced by crash barriers.
5.3.3 Repairs/rehabilitation/widening of the existing bridges shall be undertaken as follows:
(i) Rehabilitation/Repair/Widening of Existing Major bridges
Nil
(ii) Rehabilitation/Repair/Widening of Existing Minor bridges
Proposed Structure
Existing Structure Details
Existing Design Details Improvem
Sl.
Chainage Chainage Span ent
No Span / Widt
(km) (km) Width (C/C of Type Proposal
. Type Length h (m)
exp.)
Widening
RCC RCC
1 79.028 52+836 5x2.9 12.2 5x2.9 16 with
Slab Box
repair
5.3.4 Drainage system for bridge decks
An effective drainage system for bridge decks shall be provided as specified in Section 7.20
of the Manual
5.3.5 Structures in marine environment
Not Applicable
5.4 Rail-road bridges
5.4.1 Design, construction and detailing of ROB/RUB shall be as specified in section 7 of the
Manual.
5.4.2 Road over-bridges
Road over-bridges (road over rail) shall be provided at the following level crossings, as per GAD
drawings attached:
NIl
5.4.3 Road under-bridges

Road under-bridges (road under railway line) shall be provided at the following level crossings, as
per GAD drawings attached:
Nil
5.5 Grade separated structures
i. List of Vehicular underpass
Nil
ii. List of Vehicular underpass grade-II
Improvement Proposal Minimum

Design
Span Vertical Width
Sl. No Chainage
Proposal Type arrangement clearance (m)
(Km)
(m) (m)
1 60+810 New construction RCC Box 1x12 4 13
5.6 Pedestrian subway structures
Improvement Proposal
Design
Span Vertical Section
Sl. No Chainage
Proposal Type arrangement clearance Type
(Km)
(m) (m)
New RCC
1 35+360 1x4.8 2.75 2-Lane
Construction Box
The grade separated structures shall be provided at the locations and of the type and length
and width specified in Section 2.9 and 3 (a) of this Annex-I.
6 TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND ROAD SAFETY WORKS
Traffic control devices and road safety works shall be provided in accordance with section
9 of the Manual.
a) Road Signs: Road signs shall be provided as per Section 9.2 of the manual. The locations
for these provisions shall be finalised in consultation with Authority’s Engineer.
b) Road Markings: Road Markings shall be provided as per Section 9.3 of the manual. The
locations for these provisions shall be finalised in consultation with Authority’s Engineer.
c) LED Traffic Beacons: These shall be provided in the entire Project Highway near pedestrian
crossings, public gathering places (Educational Institutions, Hospitals, Worshipping Places,
etc.), cross roads, & median openings. The locations for these provisions shall be finalised
in consultation with Authority’s Engineer.
d) Reflective Pavement Markers (Road Studs): Reflective Pavement Markers shall be
provided as per Section 9.5 of the manual. The locations for these provisions shall be
finalised in consultation with Authority’s Engineer.
e) Crash Barrier: Crash barrier shall be provided at all locations as per IRC SP 73-2018 and at
locations given below.
i) Crash Barrier are to be provide at high embankment (>3m) locations as given in

below table:
LHS RHS
Design Average Design Average
Length Length
Chainage Embankment Chainage Embankment
(m) (m)
Start End Height (m) Start End Height (m)
31670 31760 4.02 90 31710 31800 7.82 90
32600 32610 3.18 10 36980 37030 3.55 50
36980 37020 3.6 40 37210 37260 4.74 50
38000 38020 3.23 20 40810 40820 3.21 10
38120 38150 3.29 30 41020 41080 10.39 60
38230 38290 8.71 60 41270 41370 23.43 100
41270 41290 3.71 20 41430 41450 5.81 20
41620 41630 3.83 10 41830 41930 3.93 100
41790 41860 3.85 70 44720 44840 3.21 120
42040 42100 8.80 60 47420 47460 3.74 40
42910 42920 3.47 10 59940 60080 4.23 140
44760 44810 3.80 50
47430 47460 3.74 30
48760 48780 3.89 20
ii) Crash Barrier are to be provide at Curve (Radius<450m) locations as given in below
table:
Design Chainage
Si No. Radius (m) Length (m)
From To
1 30+690 31+057 240 367.66
2 31+540 31+926 360 386.17
3 34+006 34+274 240 267.37
4 34+294 34+660 240 366.71
5 35+324 35+663 240 339.25
6 35+666 35+870 360 203.31
7 35+989 36+247 400 257.83
8 36+334 36+661 240 327.13
9 36+663 36+939 240 275.72
10 36+932 37+246 450 314.05
11 37+935 38+160 300 225.39
12 38+134 38+332 300 198.03
13 38+440 38+943 360 503.81
14 39+109 39+329 450 219.85
15 40+541 40+647 65 106.60
16 40+616 40+693 200 76.51
17 40+713 40+814 70 100.91
18 40+776 40+867 70 90.84
19 40+829 40+924 55 94.96
20 40+906 40+982 180 75.65
21 40+944 41+058 55 113.95
22 41+021 41+109 40 87.58
23 41+076 41+184 50 107.28
24 41+154 41+262 65 107.58
25 41+243 41+330 65 86.63
26 41+312 41+429 200 117.18
27 41+392 41+483 70 91.08
28 41+558 41+682 65 123.26
29 41+801 41+957 65 155.86
30 41+962 42+068 65 105.70
31 42+075 42+217 125 141.57
32 42+455 42+561 260 106.12
33 42+532 42+686 70 153.74
34 42+778 42+922 60 144.34
35 42+885 42+959 60 74.31
36 42+943 43+315 240 372.23
37 43+327 43+735 360 407.83
38 43+742 44+177 300 435.21
39 44+461 44+765 360 304.27
40 44+770 45+032 240 262.97
41 45+277 45+541 240 264.36
Design Chainage
Si No. Radius (m) Length (m)
From To
42 45+781 46+100 300 318.55
43 46+119 46+310 300 191.59
44 46+991 47+424 360 433.35
45 47+480 47+864 240 383.76
46 47+845 48+122 360 276.53
47 48+811 49+008 360 197.40
48 48+981 49+216 400 234.60
49 53+863 54+075 360 212.15
50 54+078 54+237 400 159.72
51 55+236 55+404 400 168.30
52 55+978 56+300 360 321.91
53 56+422 56+766 400 344.07
54 56+961 57+173 360 212.06
55 57+224 57+408 360 183.71
56 57+508 57+826 400 317.21
57 58+232 58+488 240 256.64
58 59+368 59+876 400 508.14
59 59+991 60+154 360 163.20
60 60+123 60+298 400 174.51
61 60+346 60+669 400 323.53
62 60+763 61+080 240 317.34
63 61+245 61+476 240 230.83
64 61+452 61+764 240 311.03
65 62+856 63+018 400 161.33
66 63+478 63+661 360 182.89
67 64+739 64+942 360 202.86
68 65+101 65+391 300 290.43
69 65+414 65+558 340 144.35
70 65+613 65+778 400 164.66
71 65+873 66+163 240 289.51
72 66+137 66+509 400 371.89
73 72+363 72+699 240 336.04
74 73+093 73+324 150 230.77
iii) Crash Barrier are to be provide at structure locations as per IRC SP 73-2018
Note: - The road side safety crash barrier shall be provided as per manual of Specification (IRC SP 73 2018).
f) Work Zone Traffic Management Plan (WTMPs): Work zone traffic Management Plan
(WTMPs) shall be prepared as per Section 9.9 of manual.
8.1 Specifications of the reflective sheeting shall be as per Section 9.2.3 of manual.
7 ROADSIDE FURNITURE
7.1 Roadside furniture shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Section 9 of the
Manual.
a) Overhead signs: Cantilever and Gantry sign Location and their sizes shall be finalized in
consultation with Authority’s Engineer as per IRC-SP-73-2018.
b) Road Boundary Stone (RBS): shall be provided for the entire Project Highway as per
Section 9.8 of the Manual.
c) Hectometre/Kilometre stones: shall be provided for the entire Project Highway.
d) Pedestrian facilities:
I. Pedestrian Guard Rail: Shall be provided at the location as shown in cross

section Schedule and each Bus bay location.
II. Pedestrian Crossings: Provide pedestrian crossing facilities at urban location and
service roads location as per Manual.
e) Road Delineators: Road delineators shall be provided as per IRC 79-1981 and as
per Section 9.4 of the manual.
7.2 Compulsory Afforestation
Compensatory Afforestation shall be done as per Section 11 of the manual. As per IRC SP 21:2009,
total no. of trees required for afforestation is 38520.
7.3 Hazardous Locations

The safety barriers shall also be provided at the following hazardous locations:
Sl. No. Location stretch from (km) to (km) LHS/RHS
W beam crash barriers shall be provided at embankment more than 3m, at sharp curve
and along RE/retaining wall locations.
7.4 Special Requirement for Hill Roads
Not Applicable
7.5 Rainwater Harvesting
As the project area having scarcity of water and as per ministry of Environment and Forests
Notification, New Delhi dated 14.01.1997(as amended on 13.01.1998, 05.01.1999 & 06.11.2000),
the rainwater harvesting pits are to be provided at every 500m interval of storm water drain or in
case, the drain length is less 500 m, pits are to be provided at end point of the storm water drain
before meeting to nalla near culverts, minor bridges and major bridges on both side of the road.
The recommendations are given in IRC: SP: 42-2014 clause 10.7.3 regarding provision of rainwater
harvesting.
8 BYPASS
7.5.1 Bypasses:
Design Chainage Design Length Type of

Sl. No. Bypass
Start End (m) Road
NIL
9 Built Up Section
Sl. No. Design Chainage (m) Design Length (m)

1 37+300 37+600 300
2 39+650 39+900 250
3 45+600 45+850 250
4 54+100 54+730 630
5 60+600 61+000 400
6 68+820 70+000 1180
7 70+850 71+550 700
8 72+800 73+520 720
Note: Two-metre-wide strip of land at the extreme edge of ROW shall be kept for accommodating
utilities, both over as well as underground. Utility ducts in the form of 600 mm diameter NP-4 Pipe
across the Project Highway along with inspection box/chamber at a spacing of 0.50 km shall be
provided for crossing of underground utilities in built up areas.
*******
ANNEXURE-II
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ES. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 14
ES.1 GENERAL .............................................................................................................................. 14

ES.1.1 Project Background ............................................................................................................. 14
ES.1.2 Existing Project Features ..................................................................................................... 14
ES.1.3 Existing road Deficiencies and Solution ............................................................................... 15
ES.2 SOCIO - ECONOMIC PROFILE OF AREA ................................................................................ 18
ES.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND REMEDIES .......................................................................... 20
ES.4 ENGINEERING SURVEY AND INVESTIGATION ...................................................................... 23
ES 4.1 Inventory and condition survey – Roads ............................................................................. 23
ES 4.2 Pavement Condition and Investigation ............................................................................... 24
ES 4.3 Sub Grade Investigations ..................................................................................................... 24
ES 4.4 Structural Strength Of Pavement ........................................................................................ 24
ES 4.5 Bridge, Strucures and Culverts ............................................................................................ 25
ES 4.6 Topographic Surveys............................................................................................................ 25
ES 4.7 Hydrology, Drainage Plan and Protective works................................................................. 25
ES.5 TRAFFIC SURVEYS AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 29
ES 5.1 Road Safety Issues and Traffic Calming Measures .............................................................. 30
ES 6 ENGINEERING DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT PROPOSALS .................................................. 36
ES 6.1 Design Standards ................................................................................................................. 36
ES 6.2 Geometric Improvements ................................................................................................... 36
ES 6.3 Proposal of Bypasses ........................................................................................................... 36
ES 6.4 Proposal of Realignment ..................................................................................................... 36
ES 6.5 Improvement Proposal ........................................................................................................ 37
ES 6.5 Junction Improvements ....................................................................................................... 38
ES 6.5 Toll Plaza .............................................................................................................................. 39
ES.7 PAVEMENT DESIGN............................................................................................................. 39
ES.8 IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL FOR STRUCTURES .................................................................... 39
ES.9 COST ESTIMATE ................................................................................................................... 40
ES.10 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ................................................................................ 42
ES.11 RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................... 42
1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND...................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND ALIGNMENT ............................................................................... 1-1
1.3 ESTABLISHMENT ................................................................................................................. 1-5
1.4 PROJECT APPRECIATION ..................................................................................................... 1-5
1.5 THE DISTRICT ...................................................................................................................... 1-5
1.5.1 Pali District: ........................................................................................................................ 1-5
1.5.2 Ajmer District ..................................................................................................................... 1-6
1.5.3 Rajsamand District: ............................................................................................................ 1-6
1.5.4 Bhilwara District ................................................................................................................. 1-7
1.6 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES .................................................................................. 1-7
1.6.1 Objective of Services .......................................................................................................... 1-7
1.6.2 Scope of Services................................................................................................................ 1-8
1.7 CONTENTS OF SUBMISSION ............................................................................................... 1-8
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd I Public Works Department, Rajasthan

2 INVENTORY OF PROJECT ROAD.................................................................................. 2-1
2.1 ROAD ALIGNMENT .............................................................................................................. 2-1

2.1.1 Terrain ................................................................................................................................ 2-2
2.2 LAND USE ............................................................................................................................ 2-2
2.3 CARRIAGEWAY .................................................................................................................... 2-3
2.4 SHOULDERS......................................................................................................................... 2-4
2.5 BUILT-UP SECTION/ URBAN SETTLEMENTS ........................................................................ 2-4
2.6 INTERSECTIONS / JUNCTIONS ............................................................................................. 2-5
2.7 EXISTING HIGHWAY STRUCTURES ...................................................................................... 2-7
3 ENGINEERING SURVEYS & INVESTIGATION ................................................................ 3-1
3.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 3-1

3.2 TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY................................................................................................... 3-1
3.3 TRAFFIC SURVEYS ............................................................................................................... 3-2
3.4 SURVEY METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 3-2
3.4.1 Classified Traffic Volume Counts........................................................................................ 3-2
3.4.2 Turning Movement Surveys ............................................................................................... 3-2
3.4.3 Axle Load Survey ................................................................................................................ 3-2
3.4.4 Pedestrian Count Survey .................................................................................................... 3-3
3.4.5 Accident Black Spot Study .................................................................................................. 3-3
3.4.6 Road Inventory Survey ....................................................................................................... 3-3
3.4.7 Pavement/Road Condition Survey ..................................................................................... 3-3
3.5 BENKELMAN BEAM DEFLECTION SURVEY .......................................................................... 3-5
3.6 PAVEMENT COMPOSITION/SOIL INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................ 3-6
3.7 SUB GRADE CHARACTERISTICS & STRENGTH ..................................................................... 3-7
3.8 INVESTIGATION FOR BORROW MATERIALS ..................................................................... 3-10
3.9 INVESTIGATIONS FOR MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION ................................................... 3-11
3.9.1 Fly Ash – Alternate Material for Embankment ................................................................ 3-14
3.9.2 Quarry Chart .................................................................................................................... 3-15
3.10 INVESTIGATIONS OF OTHER CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ............................................... 3-15
3.11 INVESTIGATIONS FOR STRUCTURE ................................................................................... 3-15
3.12 HYDRAULIC & HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................. 3-15
4 TRAFFIC SURVEYS AND ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 4-1
4.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 4-1

4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF HOMOGENEOUS SECTIONS................................................................ 4-1
4.3 TRAFFIC SURVEYS ............................................................................................................... 4-1
4.4 SURVEY METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 4-2
4.4.1 Classified Volume Count Survey ........................................................................................ 4-2
4.4.2 Traffic Analysis ................................................................................................................... 4-3
4.4.3 Traffic Characteristics......................................................................................................... 4-3
4.5 DATA ANALYSIS- CLASSIFIED TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNT-First Traffic Survey ..................... 4-4
4.5.1 Average Daily Traffic .......................................................................................................... 4-4
4.5.2 Daily Variation of Traffic .................................................................................................... 4-5
4.5.3 Traffic Composition ............................................................................................................ 4-7
4.5.4 Annual Average Daily Traffic .............................................................................................. 4-9
4.6 DATA ANALYSIS- CLASSIFIED TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNT: Second Traffic Survey .............. 4-11
4.6.1 Average Daily Traffic ........................................................................................................ 4-11
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd II Public Works Department, Rajasthan

4.6.2 Annual Average Daily Traffic ............................................................................................ 4-11
4.7 DATA ANALYSIS- ORIGIN DESTINATION SURVEY .............................................................. 4-13
4.7.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 4-13
4.7.2 Zoning System .................................................................................................................. 4-14
4.7.3 Expansion Factors and development of O-D matrices..................................................... 4-16
4.7.4 Lead Share ........................................................................................................................ 4-16
4.7.5 Commodity Analysis ......................................................................................................... 4-17
4.7.6 Travel Pattern................................................................................................................... 4-18
4.8 DATA ANALYSIS- TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SURVEY ................................................ 4-18
4.9 DATA ANALYSIS- PEDESTRIAN COUNT ANALYSIS ............................................................. 4-20
4.10 DATA ANALYSIS- ACCIDENT DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................... 4-20
4.10.1 Black Spot Identification .................................................................................................. 4-20
4.10.2 Recommendations for Safety........................................................................................... 4-24
5 TRAFFIC DEMAND ESTIMATE AND TOLL REVENUE ...................................................... 5-1
5.1 ESTIMATION OF TRAFFIC GROWTH RATES BY ELASTICITY METHOD ................................. 5-1

5.2 TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY ............................................................................ 5-1
5.2.1 Project Influence Area........................................................................................................ 5-2
5.3 GROWTH OF REGISTERED VEHICLES IN PROJECT INFLUENCE AREA .................................. 5-2
5.4 ECONOMIC GROWTH OF THE STATES AND ALL-INDIA ....................................................... 5-3
5.5 TRANSPORT ELASTICITY DEMAND ...................................................................................... 5-3
5.6 RECOMMENDED ELASTICITY VALUES ................................................................................. 5-4
5.7 FUTURE ECONOMIC GROWTH............................................................................................ 5-6
5.7.1 Diverted, Induced and Generated Traffic .......................................................................... 5-7
5.8 CAPACITY ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................ 5-8
5.9 TOLL PLAZAS ....................................................................................................................... 5-9
5.10 TOLLABLE TRAFFIC ............................................................................................................ 5-10
5.10.1 Discounts .......................................................................................................................... 5-10
5.10.2 Tollable Component ......................................................................................................... 5-11
5.11 TOLL REVENUE ESTIMATES ............................................................................................... 5-13
6 DESIGN STANDARDS ................................................................................................. 6-1
6.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 6-1

6.2 HIGHWAY DESIGN STANDARDS .......................................................................................... 6-1
6.3 CROSS SECTIONAL ELEMENTS ............................................................................................ 6-2
6.4 TCS SCHEDULE .................................................................................................................... 6-9
6.5 EMBANKMENT DESIGN..................................................................................................... 6-10
6.6 TOE WALL/BREAST WALL/RETAINING WALL .................................................................... 6-11
6.7 PAVEMENT DESIGN .......................................................................................................... 6-11
6.8 ROAD & TRAFFIC SIGNS .................................................................................................... 6-12
6.8.1 Signage Plans.................................................................................................................... 6-12
6.8.2 Road Signs ........................................................................................................................ 6-12
6.9 ROAD SAFETY .................................................................................................................... 6-12
6.10 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR STRUCTURES............................................................................ 6-13
6.10.1 General ............................................................................................................................. 6-13
6.10.2 Cross-sectional Elements ................................................................................................. 6-13
6.10.3 Specification for Material................................................................................................. 6-14
6.10.4 Loads and Forces to be considered in Design .................................................................. 6-15
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd III Public Works Department, Rajasthan

7 ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................. 7-19
7.1 WIDENING PROPOSAL ...................................................................................................... 7-19

7.2 GEOMETRIC IMPROVEMENTS .......................................................................................... 7-19
7.2.1 Alignment ......................................................................................................................... 7-19
7.2.2 Geometry in Forest Land.................................................................................................. 7-19
7.2.3 Geometric Improvements ................................................................................................ 7-19
7.2.4 List of Existing Deficient Curves ....................................................................................... 7-20
7.2.5 Existing Vs Design Chainages ........................................................................................... 7-20
7.3 BYPASSES AND REALIGNMENTS ....................................................................................... 7-21
7.4 BUILT-UP SECTIONS .......................................................................................................... 7-36
7.5 RIGHT OF WAY .................................................................................................................. 7-36
7.6 INTERSECTIONS / JUNCTIONS IMPROVEMENT................................................................. 7-37
7.7 Grade Separated Structures ............................................................................................. 7-39
7.8 Pedesrtian Subway ........................................................................................................... 7-39
7.9 WAYSIDE AMENITIES PROPOSED...................................................................................... 7-39
7.10 BUSBAYS AND BUS SHELTER ............................................................................................. 7-39
7.11 TRUCK LAY BYS.................................................................................................................. 7-40
7.12 TOLL PLAZA ....................................................................................................................... 7-40
8 PAVEMENT DESIGN ................................................................................................... 8-1
8.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 8-1

8.2 PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS...................................................................................... 8-2
8.2.1 Design Life .......................................................................................................................... 8-2
8.2.2 Traffic Homogenous Sections ............................................................................................ 8-2
8.2.3 Design Traffic Loading (MSA) ............................................................................................. 8-3
8.2.4 Base Year Traffic................................................................................................................. 8-3
8.2.5 Traffic Growth Rates .......................................................................................................... 8-3
8.2.6 Vehicle Damage Factors (VDFs) ......................................................................................... 8-3
8.2.7 Lane Distribution Factors ................................................................................................... 8-4
8.2.8 Traffic Loading (Cumulative Million Standard Axles) ......................................................... 8-4
8.3 PAVEMENT COMPOSITION/SOIL INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................ 8-6
8.4 PAVEMENT DESIGN FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION / WIDENING / RECONSTRUCTION ........ 8-11
8.4.1 Design Approach .............................................................................................................. 8-11
8.4.2 Granular Base & Granular Sub-Base (Option – I ) ........................................................... 8-14
8.4.3 Cemented Base and Cemented Sub-Base With Sami At Interface Of Cemented Base And
Bituminous Layer (Option – II ) ....................................................................................... 8-15
8.4.4 Flexible Pavement Design with Cemented Base and Granular Sub Base with Crack Relief
Layer of Aggregate Interlayer above the Cemented Base (Option –III ) .......................... 8-18
8.4.5 Flexible Pavement Design with Cemented base and cemented Sub Base with Crack Relief
Layer of Aggregate Interlayer above the Cemented Base (Option – IV).......................... 8-20
8.4.6 Flexible Pavement Design with Foamed Bitumen/Bitumen Emulsion Treated
Rap/Aggregate over Cemented Sub Base (Option – V) ................................................... 8-22
8.4.7 Flexible Pavement Design with Granular Base and Cemented Sub Base (Option – VI) ... 8-25
8.4.8 Pavement Design procedure ............................................................................................ 8-26
8.4.9 Pavement Design calculation ........................................................................................... 8-29
8.5 RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN ................................................................................................ 8-31
8.5.1 Axle Load Spectrum ......................................................................................................... 8-31
8.5.2 Design of Sub-grade and Sub-base .................................................................................. 8-31
8.5.3 Dry Lean Concrete ............................................................................................................ 8-31
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd IV Public Works Department, Rajasthan

8.5.4 Pavement Quality Concrete (PQC) ................................................................................... 8-31
8.5.5 Design of Rigid Pavement as Per IRC: 58-2015 ................................................................ 8-32
8.6 RECOSNTRUCTION STRETCHES ......................................................................................... 8-32
8.7 Strengthening of Existing Pavement ................................................................................ 8-32
8.8 Embankment quantity ...................................................................................................... 8-34
8.9 Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 8-35
9 STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL ..................................................................... 9-1
9.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 9-1

9.2 HYDROLOGICAL STUDY ....................................................................................................... 9-1
9.2.1 Main Objective ................................................................................................................... 9-1
9.2.2 General Description of the Project Site ............................................................................. 9-2
9.2.3 Data Collection and Data Analysis for Hydrological Study ................................................. 9-2
9.2.4 Hydrological and Hydraulic Study for Bridges.................................................................... 9-2
9.2.5 Empirical Formulae ............................................................................................................ 9-3
9.2.6 Rational Method ................................................................................................................ 9-3
9.2.7 Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method................................................................................... 9-5
9.2.8 Bridge at canal.................................................................................................................... 9-6
9.2.9 Afflux Calculation ............................................................................................................... 9-6
9.2.10 Scour Depth Calculation..................................................................................................... 9-6
9.2.11 Drainage Plan of the Project Area ...................................................................................... 9-6
9.2.12 Rainwater Harvesting Proposal .......................................................................................... 9-7
9.2.13 Structural Proposal improvement...................................................................................... 9-8
9.2.14 Summary and Recommendations ...................................................................................... 9-8
9.3 STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL ............................................................................ 9-8
9.3.1 Major Bridges ..................................................................................................................... 9-8
9.3.2 ROB’s .................................................................................................................................. 9-9
9.3.3 Minor Bridges ..................................................................................................................... 9-9
9.3.4 Grade separated structures ............................................................................................. 9-11
9.3.5 Culverts ............................................................................................................................ 9-11
9.4 SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL FOR CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES ........... 9-14
10 COST ESTIMATE ...................................................................................................... 10-1
10.1 GENERAL ........................................................................................................................... 10-1

10.2 ADOPTION OF UNIT RATES ............................................................................................... 10-1
10.2.1 Based on Rate Analysis .................................................................................................... 10-1
10.2.2 Based on Market rates ..................................................................................................... 10-1
10.3 BILL OF QUANTITIES FOR CIVIL WORKS ............................................................................ 10-1
10.4 COSTING FOR SAFETY DEVICES ......................................................................................... 10-1
10.5 TOTAL COST ESTIMATES ................................................................................................... 10-1
11 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ..................................................................... 11-3
11.1 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 11-3

11.1.1 Investment Appraisal ....................................................................................................... 11-3
11.1.2 Transport Costs ................................................................................................................ 11-3
11.1.3 Basic Data Inputs for HDM Model ................................................................................... 11-3
11.1.4 Economic Costs ................................................................................................................ 11-3
11.1.5 Vehicle Composition, Characteristics and Unit Costs ...................................................... 11-3
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd V Public Works Department, Rajasthan

11.1.6 Road Characteristics......................................................................................................... 11-3
11.1.7 Traffic Volume and Composition ..................................................................................... 11-3
11.1.8 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RESULTS ........................................................................................ 11-3
11.1.9 Sensitivity Analysis ........................................................................................................... 11-3
11.2 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 11-3
11.2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 11-3
11.2.2 Concept and Methodology .............................................................................................. 11-3
11.2.3 Financing Mechanism ...................................................................................................... 11-3
11.2.4 Civil Cost ........................................................................................................................... 11-3
11.2.5 Assumptions for Financial Analysis .................................................................................. 11-3
11.2.6 Total Project Cost (TPC) ................................................................................................... 11-3
11.2.7 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Estimates ............................................................... 11-3
11.2.8 Revenue Estimates ........................................................................................................... 11-3
11.2.9 Financial Analysis Results ................................................................................................. 11-3
11.2.10 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 11-3
11.2.11 Hybrid Annuity Model (For Package-1 Km0+000 to Km 30+000) .................................... 11-3
11.2.12 Hybrid Annuity Model (For Package-2 Km30+000 to Km 116+750) ................................ 11-6
12 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 12-1
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd VI Public Works Department, Rajasthan

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Existing Alignment Details ....................................................................................................... 2-1

Table 2-2: Terrain ..................................................................................................................................... 2-2
Table 2-3: Land Use .................................................................................................................................. 2-3
Table 2-4: Forest Area .............................................................................................................................. 2-3
Table 2-5: Width of Carriageway .............................................................................................................. 2-3
Table 2-6: Sections with Rigid Pavement ................................................................................................. 2-4
Table 2-7: List of Major Built-up & Settlements along the project road. Package-2................................ 2-4
Table 2-8 : List of Major Junctions ............................................................................................................ 2-5
Table 2-9: List of Minor Junctions............................................................................................................. 2-5
Table 2-10: Pipe Culverts .......................................................................................................................... 2-7
Table 2-11: Slab Culverts .......................................................................................................................... 2-9
Table 2-12: Minor Bridges ...................................................................................................................... 2-11
Table 2-13: List of Major Bridges ............................................................................................................ 2-11
Table 2-14: List of ROB ........................................................................................................................... 2-12
Table 3-1: Summary Pavement Condition ............................................................................................... 3-4
Table 3-2: Pavement Condition of Existing Road, Package-2 .................................................................. 3-4
Table 3-3: Summary of Characteristic Deflection, Package-2 .................................................................. 3-5
Table 3-4: Test Results of Trial Pits, Package-2 ........................................................................................ 3-7
Table 3-5: Laboratory Test Results of Sub grade Soil Samples, Package - 2............................................. 3-8
Table 3-6: Laboratory Test Results of Bypass Soil Samples, Package - 2 .................................................. 3-9
Table 3-7: List of Borrow Areas along the Project Road (Package – 2) .................................................. 3-10
Table 3-8: Laboratory Test Results of Borrow Soil Samples (Package – 2)............................................. 3-11
Table 3-9: Identified Aggregate Sources ................................................................................................ 3-12
Table 3-10: Sieve analysis for Coarse Aggregates (40 mm) .................................................................... 3-12
Table 3-11: Physical requirement for Coarse Aggregates (40 mm) ....................................................... 3-12
Table 3-12: Sieve analysis for Coarse Aggregates (20 mm) .................................................................... 3-13
Table 3-13: Physical requirement for CoarseAggregates (20 mm) ........................................................ 3-13
Table 3-14: Sieve analysis for Fine Aggregates....................................................................................... 3-13
Table 3-15: Physical requirementfor Fine Aggregates ........................................................................... 3-13
Table 3-16: Test Results of Flyash of Kota Super Thermal Power Station (KSTPS)................................. 3-14
Table 4-1: Homogeneous Traffic Sections ................................................................................................ 4-1
Table 4-2: Traffic Volume Count Survey Locations ................................................................................... 4-2
Table 4-3: Vehicle Classification and PCU Factors Used In the Study ...................................................... 4-3
Table 4-4: Average Daily Traffic Volume (ADT) ........................................................................................ 4-4
Table 4-5: Directional Distribution of Traffic (DDT) .................................................................................. 4-7
Table 4-6: Fuel Sales ................................................................................................................................. 4-9
Table 4-7: Seasonal Correction Factor...................................................................................................... 4-9
Table 4-8: Summary of Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)................................................................. 4-10
Table 4-9: Summary of Average Daily Traffic (ADT) _Second Survey ..................................................... 4-11
Table 4-10: Seasonal Correction Factor.................................................................................................. 4-12
Table 4-11: Summary of Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) _Second Survey .................................... 4-12
Table 4-12: Sample Size of OD survey .................................................................................................... 4-13
Table 4-13: Adopted Zoning System for the study ................................................................................. 4-14
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd VII Public Works Department, Rajasthan

Table 4-14: Lead Distribution (%) for Passenger Vehicles ...................................................................... 4-16
Table 4-15: Lead Distribution (%) for Goods Vehicles ............................................................................ 4-16
Table 4-16: Classification of Commodities ............................................................................................. 4-17
Table 4-17: Commodity Distribution ...................................................................................................... 4-17
Table 4-18: Distribution of Trip in the Project influence area ................................................................ 4-18
Table 4-19: Intersection Traffic on Major and Minor Road (Package – 2) ............................................ 4-19
Table 4-20: Pedestrian-Vehicular Conflict .............................................................................................. 4-20
Table 4-21: Major Accident location details ........................................................................................... 4-21
Table 5-1: Growth of Vehicle Registration in Rajasthan State ................................................................. 5-2
Table 5-2: Growth of Vehicle Registration of Trucks (All India) ............................................................... 5-3
Table 5-3: Growth of Economic Indices of Rajasthan at 2004-05 Prices .................................................. 5-3
Table 5-4: Elasticity Values Derived Based on Regression Analysisfor Rajasthan .................................... 5-4
Table 5-5: Adopted Elasticity Values of Rajasthan State .......................................................................... 5-5
Table 5-6: Future Growth of Economic Indicators for Rajasthan and All India ........................................ 5-7
Table 5-7: Traffic Growth Rates (%).......................................................................................................... 5-7
Table 5-8: Projected Total Traffic (PCU) ................................................................................................... 5-8
Table 5-9: Design Service Volume (DSV) Standards ................................................................................. 5-9
Table 5-10: Capacity Augmentation Year ................................................................................................. 5-9
Table 5-11: Proposed Toll Plaza Locations ............................................................................................... 5-9
Table 5-12: Proposed Structures ............................................................................................................ 5-10
Table 5-13: Proposed Bypass .................................................................................................................. 5-10
Table 5-14: TOLLABLE COMPONENT OF EACH MODE OF VEHICLE ........................................................ 5-11
Table 6-1: Design Standards ..................................................................................................................... 6-1
Table 6-2: Summary of Cross sectional Elements..................................................................................... 6-2
Table 6-3: TCS Schedule............................................................................................................................ 6-9
Table 6-4: List of Service Roads .............................................................................................................. 6-10
Table 6-5: Summary of widening Scheme .............................................................................................. 6-10
Table 6-6: High Embankment Section, LHS............................................................................................ 6-11
Table 6-7: High Embankment Section, RHS ............................................................................................ 6-11
Table 6-8: Locations of Earth Retaining Structures ................................................................................ 6-11
Table 7-1: Forest Area ............................................................................................................................ 7-19
Table 7-2: Proposed Geometric Improvement ....................................................................................... 7-19
Table 7-3: List of Curves having Radius less than minimum desirable (240 m) ..................................... 7-20
Table 7-4: Tentative Design Chainage vs. Existing Chainage .................................................................. 7-20
Table 7-5: List of Bypasses ...................................................................................................................... 7-22
Table 7-6: List of Realignments .............................................................................................................. 7-22
Table 8-2: Summary of Commercial Vehicles (AADT) .............................................................................. 8-3
Table 8-3: Summary of Proposed Traffic Growth Rates ........................................................................... 8-3
Table 8-4: Summary of Adopted Vehicle Damage Factors (VDFs) ........................................................... 8-4
Table 8-5: Adopted Lane Distribution Factors (LDFs) ............................................................................... 8-4
Table 8-6: Obtained and Adopted MSA for the Project Road .................................................................. 8-5
Table 8-7: Test Results of Trial Pits ........................................................................................................... 8-6
Table 8-8: Laboratory Test Results of Sub grade Soil Samples ................................................................ 8-6
Table 8-9: Laboratory Test Results of Bypass Soil Samples ...................................................................... 8-9
Table 8-10: Laboratory Test Results of Borrow Soil Samples ................................................................. 8-10
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd VIII Public Works Department, Rajasthan

Table 8-11: Adopted Effective CBR in Design calculation....................................................................... 8-11
Table 8-12: Allowable tensile and compressive strain ........................................................................... 8-15
Table 8-18: Recommended material properties for structural layers.................................................... 8-28
Table 8-19: Rigid Pavement Design for Toll Plaza Location .................................................................... 8-32
Table 8-20: Proposed Pavement Design (Flexible) ................................................................................. 8-35
Table 9-1: Details of Existing Structures ................................................................................................... 9-1
Table 9-2: Toposheets, Rainfall Data & Topographical Survey Data ........................................................ 9-2
Table 9-3: Maximum Value of P (Table 4.1: IRC: SP: 13-2004) ................................................................. 9-4
Table 9-4: List of Structures for Hydrological Study ................................................................................. 9-8
Table 9-5: Proposed Major Bridges .......................................................................................................... 9-8
Table 9-6: List of RoB’S ............................................................................................................................. 9-9
Table 9-7: Minor Bridges to be repaired and widening............................................................................ 9-9
Table 9-8: Minor Bridges In Re-Construction ........................................................................................... 9-9
Table 9-9: Minor Bridges in New-Construction ........................................................................................ 9-9
Table 9-10: Improvement Proposal of VUP ............................................................................................ 9-11
Table 9-11: Improvement Proposal of VUP Grade-II .............................................................................. 9-11
Table 9-12: Improvement Proposal of Culverts by Pipe Culvert ............................................................ 9-11
Table 9-13: List of pipe culverts for Repair and Widening ..................................................................... 9-12
Table 9-14:Improvement Proposal for Slab Culverts ............................................................................. 9-13
Table 9-15: List of Culverts to be reconstructed by Box Culvert ............................................................ 9-13
Table 9-16: List of Additional Box Culverts ............................................................................................. 9-14
Table 9-17: List of New Pedstrain Subway ............................................................................................. 9-14
Table 9-18: List of Culverts to be retained ............................................................................................. 9-14
Table 9-19: Summary of Proposed Structures ....................................................................................... 9-15
Table 10-1: General Abstract of Cost Package-2 (km 30+050 to Km 74+000) ...................................... 10-2
Table 11-1: Total Transport Costs........................................................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-2: Vehicle Characteristics, Utilization Data, and Economic Unit Costs.................................... 11-3
Table 11-3: HDM Input - Road Sections – Basic data ............................................................................. 11-3
Table 11-4: HDM Input - Road Sections – Condition of the Project Road .............................................. 11-3
Table 11-5: Summary AADT Considered for Economic Analysis ............................................................ 11-3
Table 11-6: Economic Analysis Results ................................................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-7: Sensitivity Results for Project Road ..................................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-8: Implementation Schedule ................................................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-9: : CAPEX Phasing ................................................................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-10: Capital Structure and Cost of Capital ................................................................................ 11-3
Table 11-11: Depreciation rules ............................................................................................................. 11-3
Table 11-12: Tax Rates............................................................................................................................ 11-3
Table 11-13: O&M Assumptions – I ........................................................................................................ 11-3
Table 11-14: O&M Assumptions – II ....................................................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-15: Toll Revenue Projections (in INR Crores) ........................................................................... 11-3
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd IX Public Works Department, Rajasthan

Table 11-16: Financial Analysis BOT Summary (Package 2 & Package 3) ............................................... 11-3
Table 11-17: CAPEX Phasing ................................................................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-18: HAM – TPC Calculation ...................................................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-19: HAM Financial Analysis Results (Package 1) ...................................................................... 11-3
Table 11-20: Profit & Loss Statement – HAM Case (Package-1) ............................................................ 11-4
Table 11-21: HAM Pay-out – Construction Support (Package 1) ........................................................... 11-5
Table 11-22: HAM Year-wise Pay-outs – Annuity, Interest and O&M (Package 1) ................................ 11-5
Table 11-23: Summary of all payments in HAM (Package 1) ................................................................. 11-5
Table 11-24: CAPEX Phasing (Package 2 & Package 3) ........................................................................... 11-6
Table 11-25: HAM – TPC Calculation (Package 2 & Package 3) ............................................................. 11-6
Table 11-26: HAM Financial Analysis Results (Package 2 & Package 3) ................................................ 11-7
Table 11-27: Profit & Loss Statement – HAM Case (Package 2 & Package 3) ........................................ 11-8
Table 11-28: HAM Pay-out – Construction Support (Package 2 & Package 3) ....................................... 11-9
Table 11-29: HAM Year-wise Pay-outs – Annuity, Interest and O&M (Package 2 & Package 3) ........... 11-9
Table 11-30: Summary of all payments in HAM (Package 2 & Package 3) ............................................ 11-9
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd X Public Works Department, Rajasthan

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure ES-1: Typical Cross Section for usage of Flyash in Embankment Sections ......................................23
Figure ES-2: Typical Cross Section for usage of Flyash in Retained Sections .............................................23
Figure ES-3: Drainage Plan Ch. 0.000 to Ch. 36.500 ...................................................................................27
Figure ES-4 : Drainage Pattern of Part road from ch. 36.500 to 64.000 Km ..............................................28
Figure ES-5: Drainage Pattern of Part road from ch. 64.000 to 116.700 Km (End Point) ..........................28
Figure ES-6: Accident Black Spot Location Map .........................................................................................33
Figure 1-1: Project Key Map ..................................................................................................................... 1-3
Figure 1-2: Proposed Changes in the Alignment Plan .............................................................................. 1-4
Figure 2-1: Terrain .................................................................................................................................... 2-2
Figure 2-2: Built-up Areas ......................................................................................................................... 2-5
Figure 2-3: Existing Slab culverts ............................................................................................................ 2-10
Figure 2-4: Condition of Major Bridge .................................................................................................... 2-12
Figure 3-1: Pavement Condition ............................................................................................................... 3-5
Figure 3-2 :Test Pits .................................................................................................................................. 3-6
Figure 3-3: Borrow Area Locations ......................................................................................................... 3-11
Figure 4-1: Traffic Surveys Location Map ................................................................................................. 4-2
Figure 4-2: Traffic Volume at Various Traffic Count Locations ................................................................. 4-5
Figure 4-3: Daily Variation of traffic flows at km 82 of MDR-84 ............................................................. 4-5
Figure 4-4: Daily Variation of traffic flows at km 62 of MDR-84 .............................................................. 4-6
Figure 4-5: Hourly Variation of Traffic Flows at km 82 of MDR-84 .......................................................... 4-6
Figure 4-6: Hourly Variation of Traffic Flows at km 62 of MDR-84 .......................................................... 4-7
Figure 4-7: Composition of Traffic Volumes at km 82 of MDR-84............................................................ 4-8
Figure 4-8: Composition of Traffic Volumes at km 62 of MDR-84........................................................... 4-8
Figure 4-9: Traffic flow during peak hour (PCUs) at Sanva Junction (km 103.570_MDR-84)................. 4-19
Figure 4-10: Traffic flow (PCUs) at Sanva Junction (km 103.570_MDR-84) ........................................... 4-20
Figure 4-11: Accident Locations along Project Road .............................................................................. 4-23
Figure 5-1: Trend of production of commercial vehicles in India............................................................. 5-6
Figure 6-1: Typical Cross Section 8 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction – Existing
Pavement ) ............................................................................................................................ 6-3
Figure 6-2:Typical Cross Section 9 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction/ New
Construction with Drain) ....................................................................................................... 6-3
Figure 6-3:Typical Cross Section 10 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Bypass – New
Construction) ........................................................................................................................ 6-4
Figure 6-4:Typical Cross Section 11 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction / New
Construction – In Hilly area).................................................................................................. 6-4
Figure 6-5:Typical Cross Section 12 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction/ New
Construction in Hilly Area) .................................................................................................... 6-5
Figure 6-1:Typical Cross Section 13 : Two lane carriageway with Paved Shoulder (VUP/ ROB
Approach with RE wall) ......................................................................................................... 6-5
Figure 6-1:Typical Cross Section 14 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Major Bridge/ROB)..................... 6-6
Figure 6-1 : Typical Cross Section 15 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (VUP Approach with
Retaining structure and Service Road).................................................................................. 6-6
Figure 6-9 : Embankment (Height More Then 3m) With Core Of Fly Ash for Filling sections .................. 6-7
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd XI Public Works Department, Rajasthan

Figure 6-10 : Embankment (Height More Then 3m) With Core Of Fly Ash for Four Lane VUP/ROB
Approach with Retaining Structure ...................................................................................... 6-7
Figure 6-11 : Embankment (Height More Then 3m) With Core Of Fly Ash for Two Lane VUP/ROB
Approach with Retaining Structure ...................................................................................... 6-8
Figure 7-1: Options for Rajiyawas Realignment ..................................................................................... 7-24
Figure 7-2:: Options for Pipali Bariya Realignment ................................................................................ 7-26
Figure 7-3: Options for Hiradhani Realignment ..................................................................................... 7-28
Figure 7-4: Options for Kaniyakhera and Kotra Realignment ................................................................. 7-30
Figure 7-5: Options for Ojiyana Realignment ......................................................................................... 7-32
Figure 7-6: Options for Badnor Realignment ......................................................................................... 7-34
Figure 7-7: Options for Asind Realignment ............................................................................................ 7-36
Figure 8-1:: Typical Layer Combination for Flexible Pavement with Granular Base and Granular
Sub-base ................................................................................................................................ 8-1
Figure 8-2: Typical Layer Combination for Rigid Pavement ..................................................................... 8-2
Figure 8-3: Traffic Homogenous Sections................................................................................................. 8-2
Figure 8-4: Subgrade CBR Value ............................................................................................................... 8-8
Figure 8-5: Bypass/Realignment Soil CBR Value..................................................................................... 8-10
Figure 8-6: Stresses and Strains of a Flexible Pavement ........................................................................ 8-11
Figure 8-7: Bituminous Surfacing with Wet Mix Macadam Base & Granular Sub-Base......................... 8-15
Figure 8-8: Cemented base and cemented sub-base with SAMI at interface of cemented base
and bituminous layer .......................................................................................................... 8-17
Figure 8-9: Bituminous Surfacing with Cement Treated Base & Granular Sub-Base with
Aggregate Interlayer ........................................................................................................... 8-19
Figure 8-10: Bituminous Surfacing with Cement Treated Base & Granular Sub-Base with
Aggregate Interlayer ........................................................................................................... 8-22
Figure 8-11: Bituminous Surfacing with RAP & Cemented Sub-Base ..................................................... 8-24
Figure 8-12: Bituminous Surfacing with Wet Mix Macadam Base & Cemented Sub-Base .................... 8-26
Figure 9-1 : General studies of Hydrological and Hydraulic Analysis ....................................................... 9-2
Figure 9-2 : f -Curve .................................................................................................................................. 9-4
Figure 9-3: Rainwater Harvesting arrangement ....................................................................................... 9-7
Figure 11-1: HDM-IV Output for Base Case and ..................................................................................... 11-3
Figure 11-2: HDM-IV Outputs for Case-II and Case-III ............................................................................ 11-3
Figure 11-3 : PPP Financing Options ....................................................................................................... 11-3
Figure 11-4 : Hybrid Annuity Model (HAM)............................................................................................ 11-3
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd XII Public Works Department, Rajasthan

LIST OF ANNEXURES
Annexure 2.1 Road Inventory Survey
Annexure 3.1 Pavement Condition Survey

Annexure 3.2 Benkelman Beam Deflection Survey
.3
Annexure 3.3 Quary Chart
Annexure 3.4 Structure Inventory
Annexure 4.1 Classified Volume Count Surveys

Annexure 4.2 Origin Destination Surveys
Annexure 4.3 Turning Movement Count Survey
Annexure 5.1 Traffic Projections
Annexure 6.1 Road Safety and Traffic Calming Schedule
Annexure 8.1 Data and Analysis of Axle load surveys

Annexure 8.2 MSA Calculations
Annexure 9.1 Hydrological Study of Major and Minor Bridges

Annexure 9.2 Improvement Proposal for Cross Drainage Structures
Annexure 10.1 Cost Estimate

Annexure 10.2 Rate Analysis
.3
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd XIII Public Works Department, Rajasthan

Feasibility Report cum Preliminary design for upgradation of NH-158 Final Feasibility cum
connecting to Ras-Beawar-Mandal in the state of Rajasthan (Package-II) Preliminary Design Report
ES. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 GENERAL
“The Authority” is engaged in the development of National Highways and as part of this endeavour, the
Authority has decided to upgrade Ras - Beawar- Asind - Mandal section of NH-158 in the state of
Rajasthan.
The National highways Authority of India (NHAI) has appointed M/s. Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd. for
providing the required consultancy services for preparation of Feasibility Report cum Preliminary Design
for up gradation of Ras-Beawar-Asind-Mandal section of NH 158, in the state of Rajasthan on
Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) basis.
NHAI Delhi through their letter NHAI/RJ/11019/BOT/DPR/NH-158/2013/3718 dated 25.09.2013

instructed the consultants to commence the Assignment, and the project activities thereafter. The
Contract agreement for the assignment was signed on 24th September 2013. In 11 th November 2014,
Project Authority is transferred from NHAI to Public Works Department, NH Division, Rajasthan, through
tripartite agreement.
The scope of the project is to establish the technical, economic and financial viability of the project and
prepare Feasibility Report cum Preliminary Design for up-gradation of Ras-Beawar-Asind-Mandal
Section of NH-158 in the state of Rajasthan.
ES.1.1 Project Background
The project road starts at km 129.000 (SH-39) at Ras and ends at km 10.940 (SH-61) near Mandal
connecting to NH-48. The project stretch passes through Pali, Ajmer, Rajsamand and Bhilwara districts
of Rajasthan. Project road passes through important towns/villages like Ras, Jagatiya, Bhagatpura,
Babra, Roopnagar, Beawar, Laxmipura, Nimba Hera, Asind, Badnor and Mandal. Total length of this
existing link is about 134.000 kms including overlap section. The project stretch traverses through
rolling and hilly terrain and have mostly poor geometry except few locations where curve improvement
may not be required. The existing length project road is km 115.020 excluding the overlapping sections
of NH-8, and Shree Cement road, about 134 kms including overlapping sections.
ES.1.2 Existing Project Features
The existing features of project

road are ascertained through
inventory surveys. The project
road is passing through plain,
rolling and hilly terrains,
predominantly surrounded by
barren / agricultural lands. The
present road is having two lane
carriageways in most of the
length i.e. 94.660 km;
remaining length is comprised
of single and intermediate lane.
The earthen shoulders of about

0.0-1.0 m are observed along
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd ES-14 Public Works Department, Rajasthan

the project highway. The height of embankment varies from 0.00 to 0.6 m in most of the stretches.
Approximately 64villages are observed along the project stretch.
The existing alignment comprises of 96 nos. sharp horizontal curves and 16 nos. deficient vertical
curves. The existing ROW is varying from 15-30 m. The existing junctions are not up to IRC standards.
The project road predominantly passes through barren land. The major built-up sections along the
project road are Ras, Badnor, Asind and Mandal.
The project road is having one major bridge one ROB, 14 minor bridges, 81 slab culverts, 140 pipe
culverts, 2 causeways. All minor bridges are having RCC solid slab type superstructure, stone masonry
wall type substructure and with open foundation. The pipe culverts are generally in poor working
condition, with pipe dia less than or equal to 0.6 m, however some of them are found in choked
condition due to accumulation of waste/garbage and siltation.
ES.1.3 Existing road Deficiencies and Solution
The existing alignment predominantly passes through barren land and traverses through patches of
dense urban built up sections. Alignment comprises of 96 nos. sharp horizontal curves and blind spots.
The following table provides the location of deficient geometry along the project road.
The deficient/substandard horizontal curves are improved by providing the required radius as per the
codal provision for the design speed of 80kmph/100kmph.
Deficient Horizontal Geometry and Improvement
Table ES-1: Deficient Horizontal Geometry and Improvement
Existing Chainage Existing Proposed Improved Design

From To Radius (m) Radius (m) Speed
1480 1580 100 500 100
1700 1780 80 500 100
1920 1960 80 500 100
Realignment with Straight Geometry
2120 2280 50
eliminating Curve
99880 99800 80 Realignment with Straight Geometry
99740 99700 80 eliminating Curve
99400 99280 80 240 80
98220 98140 80 240 80
98080 97980 80
eliminating Curve
97940 97540 80 360 80
97340 97160 80 400 80
97120 97040 80
eliminating Curve
96540 96420 80
240 80
96360 96300 80
96300 96180 100
eliminating Curve
96120 96040 80 240 80


94660 94560 80 300 80
94480 94400 80 300 80
94060 94000 50
300 80
93740 93660 100
93720 93660 80
93660 93600 80
eliminating Curve
93600 93500 80
93280 93120 80 450 80
92460 92320 120 1000 100
89080 89000 80 240 80
87350 87140 80 360 80
87140 87000 50
eliminating Curve
86780 86680 50 240 80
84880 84740 80
Realignment with improved geometry for
84560 84440 80
Design Speed of 80kmph. Kaniya Khera
84440 84340 30
Village
84240 84140 80
83860 83780 80 Realignment with improved geometry for
83660 83600 50 Design Speed of 80kmph. Bhairopoora
83600 83540 50 Village
82380 82220 80 500 100
82000 81920 80
81760 81660 80 Design Speed of 80kmph. Ojiyana Village
81660 81560 50
77960 77860 120 360 80
77760 77680 100 400 80
75760 75660 80 360 100
74800 74700 100 360 80
74260 74140 80 400 100
73580 73460 80 240 80


73240 73120 80
71760 71700 80 Design Speed of 80kmph. Badhor Village
71660 71560 80
70660 70480 150 400 100
70240 70080 80 240 80
65820 65720 80 300 80
65080 64980 80 240 80
64800 64660 80 400 100
Deficient Vertical Geometry and Improvement
The existing alignment predominantly passes through barren land and traverses through patches of
dense urban built up sections. Alignment comprises of 16nos. of deficient vertical curves and blind
spots. The following table provides the location of deficient geometry along the project road.
Table ES-2: Deficient Vertical Geometry and Improvement
Design Chainage
Existing Geometry Improvements
From To
Profile is raised by proposing a new box
Dip in existing profile due to slab culvert and smoothening the profile by
41340 41540
culvert a low level providing vertical curve of a larger radius
required for 80kmph/100kmph
Mild gradient is provided by removing
Steep Gradient with Sharp Valley undulations and vertical curves with larger
42100 42310
curve radius are introduced for smooth riding
quality.
Road sections raised as per the
Existing Road at existing ground
48860 49340 embankment and HFL criteria stipulated in
level with no embankment
IRC SP 73
Road sections raised as per the
Existing Road at existing ground
57110 57780 embankment and HFL criteria stipulated in
level with no embankment
IRC SP 73
Road section is reconstructed by raising
64040 67940 Existing road is in poor condition.
embankment.
Urban Developments-Congestions and Solutions
The project stretches passes through Pali, Ajmer, Rajasamand and Bhilwara districts of Rajasthan.
Project road passes through important towns/villages like Ras, Jagatiya, Bhagatpura, Babra, Roopnagar,
Beawar, Laxmipura, Nimba Hera, Asind, Badnor and Mandal.
The details of existing ROW in the urban settlement areas are as mentioned below:

Table ES-3: Urban Developments-Existing ROW
Design Chainage
S.No. Length Village Exsti. Row
Start End
1 30+650 33+500 2.85 RAJIYAWAS 10 to 15
2 36+045 37+100 1.055 PEEPLI KA BADIYA 8 to 10
3 43+000 44+100 1.1 HEERA KA BADIYA 8 to 10
4 47+030 48+630 1.6 KANIYA KHEDA 8 to 10
5 49+600 50+600 1 OZIYANA 8 to 10
6 54+000 55+000 1 MAVLA 10 to 12
7 57+950 59+770 1.82 BADNOR 8 to 10
8 70+020 72+625 2.605 ASIND 15 to 20
In the above-mentioned sections acquisition of ROW for widening / redevelopment is very difficult due
dense settlements. Rehabilitation and Resettlement will be more if existing road is widened to Four lane
or Two lane with paved shoulder. So, Realignments and Bypasses are proposed are below mentioned
locations in order to provide a safe and congestion free passage to road users.
Table ES-4: Proposed ROW in bypass and realignment
S.NO. VILLAGE DECONGESTION PROPOSAL PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY

1 RAJIYAWAS Realignment
2 PEEPLI KA BADIYA Realignment
3 HEERA KA BADIYA Realignment
4 KANIYA KHEDA Realignment
30 m
5 OZIYANA Realignment
6 BADNOR Realignment
7 Mavla Realignment
8 ASIND Bypass
ES.2 SOCIO - ECONOMIC PROFILE OF AREA
The objective the project is to provide better connectivity of various existing National Highways in the
country and thereby help induce socio-economic development in the project area. Improvements of
these selected national highway would improveconnectivity, facilitate speedy and smooth
transportation of bulk goods with less interruption at a lesser transport cost and in less time, induce
economic development of existing growth centres, provide impetus for the development of new growth
centres, employment generation and as a consequence poverty alleviation in the project areas.
Employment Generation
Labour-intensive approach is to be adopted in order to make labour as the predominant resource, while
ensuring cost-effectiveness and safeguarding quality. This involves a judicious combination of labour
and appropriate equipment, which is generally light equipment. It also means ensuring that labour-
intensive projects do not degenerate into “make-work” projects, in which cost and quality aspects are
ignored. Labour-intensive construction results in the generation of a significant increase in employment
opportunities per unit of expenditure by comparison with conventional capital-intensive methods Local
labourers can be trained for carrying out various construction activities. In some cases, labour may be

more effectively substituted in a fairly narrow range of construction or maintenance processes, for
example, only in excavation work. Mostly, however, the range is quite broad, including (in the case of
roads) clearing, topsoil and root removal, excavation, some haulage and spreading. This decision must
be based on an individual analysis of the situation. The following points listed plays and important role
in generating employment for locals:
 Site organization and management

 Incentive schemes (bonuses, rewards, task work, piece work)
 Safety and health Accident prevention and insurance coverage
 Design and quality of tools
 Environmental conditions
 Regular and timely payment
 Effective communication
Local people can also be trained to use the simple construction equipment’s used at difference stage of
road construction like rollers, water sprinklers using tractors, drivers for local vehicles used to transport
labours etc.
CSR Activities
1) RO Water Plants:
Setting up RO Water Plants: Ambuja Cement, Shree Cement and Ultratech Cements can undertake a
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Public Health and Engineering Department (PHED) of
Rajasthan. These plants, with capacities ranging from 1,000 to 3,000 litres per hour can be installed to
provide safe drinking water to people living in villages.
2) Sewing Stations and Handicrafts:

The companies along the project which are going to be benefitted by the development of the
infrastructure should be insisted along with the project road developer to develop training institutes
which would facilitate the rural woman to learn sewing and stitching, handicraft items from locally
available materials etc. which can generate employment.
3) Healthcare and Sanitation for communities:
 Primary Healthcare Centres (PHC)

They are essentially rural health care facility with single-physician clinics along with provisions for minor
surgeries. They are part of the government-funded public health system in India and are the most basic
units of this system. The staff should be well educated and trained to deal with the following issues:
 Infants Immunization programs
 Anti – epidemic programs
 Birth Control programs
 Pregnancy related Care
 Medical Emergencies related to Snake bites, Rabbies etc.
Trauma Centres
Trauma Centres should have physical infrastructure in terms of emergency room, inpatient wards,
operation theatres, intensive care unit and blood bank facilities. A designated trauma team with
speciality services for managing polytrauma were should be available with skill of performing multiple
tasks. Neurosurgeons and rehabilitative nursing staff should be available, and a radiographer should be
available on a 24/7 basis. A nursing personnel with formal training in trauma care and standard

operating protocols should be available for trauma care. Resources for acute resuscitation were
partially adequate. The hospital should have resources to manage head, abdomen, chest and spine
injuries. For the project road Medical Aid Post will be set up at Toll Plaza Ch.13.905 and Ch.73.850
which will incorporate all the medical facilities for emergencies.
Local Transportation
It has been recorded during the site visit and public consultation that there is unavailability of the public
transport therefore community has to use the private transport which frequency is very less. Hence
public transport is required to decrease both travel time and fair.
Setting up of public umbrella bodies that have the capacity to make assessment of demand on various
routes and contract services that can be properly monitored. The umbrella bodies should also mange
common facilities like the bus stations, depots, terminals, and control centre etc. and provide for the
maintenance facilities. Such umbrella bodies should be formed including all the major stakeholders -
Shree Cements, Ambuja Cements, Ultratech Cement, Government Authority and private operators.
Development Plans
 Tourism
There are no spots of tourism on this stretch so development of the project road will not enhance the
tourism in and around the area of project road.
 Agriculture
The development of the project road will provide good connectivity to the nearby bigger villages and
town centres. Bhilwara has the biggest Mandi in the vicinity of the project road which is around 152km
from the start point of the project and around 46km from Mandal. The farmers can get good quality of
seeds and fertilizers and even knowledge from Knowledge centres set up by government in city centres
which provide information regarding the type of crops to be cultivated according to type of soil and
water availability in the region. Due to better connectivity farmers can sell their produce in Bhilwara
market which can fetch a good amount. There will be an overall improvement in farming and quality of
goods produced which will in turn bring prosperity and wealth in the region.
 Industry
Major industry found on the project road is that of Cement. Development of the project road will give a
better connectivity with other regions which provides the raw material to industry. The raw materials
will reach the industries early and which in turn will increase the production of Cement and cement
related products.
ES.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND REMEDIES
a) Ground Water and Improvement Techniques
i. Storage of Rainwater on Surface

The rainwater from the roof tops or the excess runoff from the road and streets can be
collected in a trenches or pits. This stored water can be utilized to revitalize the ground
level water and improve its quality. This also helps to raise the level of ground water which
then can be easily accessible. When fed into the ground level wells and tube well are
prevented from drying up. This increases soil fertility.
ii. Surface Runoff Harvesting:

Harvesting rainwater checks surface run off of water and reduces soil erosion. Rain water
can also be collected by creating small artificial ponds. Surface run off harvesting is most

suitable in urban areas. Here rain water flows away as surface run off and can be stored for
future use. Surface runoff rain water in ponds, tanks and reservoirs built for this purpose.
This can provide water for farming, for cattle and also for general domestic use. Without
sufficient water health and hygiene are severely affected. This adds to the environmental
pollution. Surface water can be stored by redirecting the flow of small creeks and streams
into reservoirs on the surface or underground.
The locations of the ponds are as below which can be redevelope and utilized for water storage.
Design Distance from

Sr. no. Side
Chainage Proposed Road
1 33600 RHS 360m
2 35800 LHS 390m
3 39900 RHS 325m
4 43000 RHS Adjacent to Road
5 44600 LHS 300m
6 47800 RHS 160m
7 48500 RHS 145m
8 49600 RHS 50m
9 51200 RHS 50m
10 72600 LHS 150m
b) Borrow Area Redevelopment Plans
The objective of the rehabilitation programme is to return the borrow pit sites to a safe and secure
area, which the general public should be able to safely enter and enjoy. Securing borrow pits in a stable
condition is fundamental requirement of the rehabilitation process.
i. Restoring the productive use of the land
Topsoil must be placed, seeded, and mulched within 30 days of final grading if it is within a
current growing season or within 30 days of the start of the next growing season. Vegetative
material used in reclamation must consist of grasses, legumes, herbaceous, or woody plants or
a combination thereof, useful to the community for the fuel and fodder needs. Plants must be
planted during the first growing season following the reclamation phase. Selection and use of
vegetative cover must take into account soil and site characteristics such as drainage, pH,
nutrient availability, and climate to ensure permanent growth. The vegetative cover is
acceptable if within one growing season of seeding, the planting of trees and shrubs results in a
permanent stand, or regeneration and succession rate, sufficient to assure a 75% survival rate.
c) Erosion Control Measures in High Embankments
There are many methods that could be used to help prevent or stop erosion on steep slopes, some of
which are listed below.
i. Plants and Shrubs

Grass and shrubs are very effective at stopping soil erosion. This is primarily because plant
roots tend to hold soil together, making it harder to erode. The leaves of the plants also help
to reduce the velocity of raindrops falling on the ground, making it harder for them to dislodge
the soil and erode it. Ornamental grass and low, spreading shrubs work best as they leave no
areas of bare soil exposed to the elements.

ii. Erosion Control Blankets

There are many varieties of fiber, biodegradable, and compost blankets/mats available
commercially, and they have all been designed with one aim; to minimize the effects of water
erosion on slopes and embankments. Rolled mats are usually made from mulch that is held
together by a fiber mesh. They degrade slowly, allowing vegetation that may have been grown
in the area to grow and take over the job of protecting the soil from erosion when the mats
have finally degraded completely. Compost erosion control blankets act similarly to mulch
products but provide organic nutrients that promote vegetation growth, even in areas where
germination, moisture management and irrigation could be challenging.
d) Ground Water Recharge
i. Recharge Shaft / Rainwater Harvesting Pit:

This is the most efficient and cost-effective technique to recharge unconfined aquifer overlain
by poorly permeable strata. Recharge shaft may be dug manually if the strata is of non-caving
nature. The diameter of shaft is normally more than 2 m. The shaft should end in more
permeable strata below the top impermeable strata. It may not touch water table. The unlined
shaft should be backfilled, initially with boulders/ cobbles followed by gravel and coarse sand. In
case of lined shaft, the recharge water may be fed through a smaller conductor pipe reaching
up to the filter pack. These recharge structures are very useful for village ponds where shallow
clay layer impedes the infiltration of water to the aquifer. It is seen that in rainy season village
tanks are fully filled up but water from these tanks does not percolate down due to siltation and
tubewell and dugwells located nearby remains dried up. The water from village tanks get
evaporated and is not available for the beneficial use. By constructing recharge shaft in tanks,
surplus water can be recharged to ground water. Recharge shafts of 0.5 to 3 m. diameter and
10 to 15 m. deep are constructed depending upon availability of quantum of water. The top of
shaft is kept above the tank bed level preferably at half of full supply level. These are back filled
with boulders, gravels and coarse sand. In upper portion of 1 or 2 m depth, the brick masonry
work is carried out for the stability of the structure. Through this technique all the accumulated
water in village tank above 50% full supply level would be recharged to ground water. Sufficient
water will continue to remain in tank for domestic use after recharge
e) Utilisation of Flyash in Road Construction
Fly Ash is a lightweight material, which may be used for construction of embankment, sub-grades etc.
singly or by mixing with suitable admixtures. The flyash is laid in alternate layers with soil and earth
blankets are also provided on the side slopes for the confinement of the materials as per IRC: SP: 58 –
Guidelines for use of Flyash in Road Embankment. The guidelines regarding design / construction of
embankments are given in IRC SP: 58-2001.
The thermal power plant at Kota Super Thermal Power Station (KSTPS) is nearest to our project highway
& is at a distance of 168+000 kms from project Highway. Flyash can provide technically viable,
environmentally sound & cost effective alternative to natural borrow soil. The typical cross section is as
shown below:

Figure ES-1: Typical Cross Section for usage of Flyash in Embankment Sections
Figure ES-2: Typical Cross Section for usage of Flyash in Retained Sections
i. Utilisation of Low-Grade Cement
Low grade cement will be utilized in the pavement layers. Cement Treated Subbase is proposed in
pavement layer and low grade cement is proposed for utilization.
ES.4 ENGINEERING SURVEY AND INVESTIGATION
ES 4.1 Inventory and condition survey – Roads
While conducting Inventory survey of Road the existing phicical feature and surrounding condition of
the project road was ascertainded. Some of the silent feature of existing road described below
Road width
Width of existing ROW available is 9-24m.
Existing Shoulder
The width of shoulders is varying from 0.000 to 1.200 m. Shoulders are in fair to poor condition in most
of the project length.
Terrain
The terrain along the projects road is predominantly rolling and plain except few sections having hilly
terrain.
Land use

The observed land use pattern along the project road is mainly barren, agricultural and urban. The
barren and agricultural land constitutes about 37-40.5%, 42-48% and 15-17.5% respectively from Raas-
Beawar. The barren and agricultural land constitutes about 68-72%, 9-12% and 19-20% respectively
from Beawar-Mandal.
ES 4.2 Pavement Condition and Investigation
The existing pavement is in good condition for 77.6% of length, fair condition in 17.6% and poor
condition in 11.4 % of the project length. The existing shoulders are in poor condition. The summary of
pavement condition is given in Table ES.5.
Table ES-5: Summary of Pavement Condition
Condition % of Length
Good 77.6
Fair 17.6
Poor 11.4
Failed 5.8
ES 4.3 Sub Grade Investigations
Sub-grade investigations are conducted by making the test pits along the project highway. The subgrade
investigations are carried out from the collected the samples.
The wearing of course of existing highway varies from 60-100 mm; base course are varying from 100-
250mm. The sub-base is found intermittently in 10% length with average thickness of 200mm. The
overall thickness of pavement is in the range of 210-530 mm and base and sub base thicknesses is not
adequate there for reconstruction is proposed .
The analysis of existing sub-grade material shows, the CBR values are in the range of 6% to 8.2% and the
borrow soil also has CBR of 7.8-11.3%. The below table gives the test results of sub-grade materials.
Type of material CBR Range 90th percentile CBR value

Existing Subgrde 6.0% - 8.2% 6.2%
Bypass/realignment OGL area 5.0% - 8.2% 5.6%
Borrow area 7.8% -10% 8.2%
ES 4.4 Structural Strength Of Pavement
The evaluation of structural strength of existing flexible pavement was carried out using a Benkelman
Beam method in accordance with the procedure given in IRC 81-1997.
Detailed pavement condition survey and pavement investigations have been carried out to assess the
strength of the existing flexible pavement. Based on the observations from pavement
condition/investigations, strengthening measures have been finalized. The characteristic deflection
values(Dc) varies from 0.278mm to 2.140mm and the overlay thickness varies from 50mm to 120mm in
terms of BC and DBM.

ES 4.5 Bridge, Strucures and Culverts
The project road is having, 7 minor bridges, 29 slab culverts, 2 box culverts and 74 pipe culverts along
the existingroad. The structural condition of most of the culverts is generally fair to poor.
ES 4.6 Topographic Surveys
Topographic surveys were carried out in the month of November 2013 and in July 2015 for bypass and
realignments. Survey has been carried out using DGPS & Total Station.
ES 4.7 Hydrology, Drainage Plan and Protective works
Hydrological study
For performing the hydrological and hydraulic analysis which essentially need the design flood of a
specific return period for fixing the waterway vis-à-vis the design HFL of bridges depending upon their
size and importance to ensure safety as well as economy. As per IRC: SP: 13-2004 & IRC: 5-2015-Section
I General Features of Design specify that the waterway of a bridge is to be designed for a maximum
flood of 100 years return period. The catchment area shall be marked on the topo sheets of Survey of
India for their assessment.
The following methods can be used to estimate the peak discharge for bridge sites on streams;
 Dicken’s Formula
 Rational Method
 Synthetic Unit Hydrograph (in case of Catchment Area>25 Sq.Km)
Highest of above shall be considered as design discharge. With the design discharge, calculations for the
100-year highest flood level shall be obtained using manning’s equation based on the 100-year flood
discharge. Afflux calculation, span arrangement and scour levels for piers and abutment shall be
estimated.
Road drainage shall be designed to cater the rainwater into the side drain quickly in order to avoid
stagnation of rainwater over road surface. The IRC SP 42:2014 will generally be followed for design of
highway drainage. The planning of highway and drainage is intricately linked with the terrain, alignment
of the highway and the proposed cross drainage works.
Overall cross drainage shows that almost all stream are from right to left considering increasing
chainage.
Rainwater harvesting pits are also proposed for recharge of ground water from flowing rainwater in
road side drains.
Protective Works
The proposed protective measures are to be provided for culverts as per IRC SP13:2004. Floor pitching
for flexible & rigid apron shall be provided to withstand under flow condition. Wingwalls / slope pitching
near abutments in case of bridges shall also be given to safeguard under flooding.

Drainage Plan of the Project Area
There are defined rivers, streams and canal crossing alignment. Some of the major rivers crossing the
alignment such as Lilri River, Khari River and Mansi River in which Lilri river is flowing from left to right
and other two rivers are flowing from right to left in the direction of increasing chainage. Other minor
bridge whose hydrological analysis is carried out having catchment area less than 25 sq. Km and streams
are of local stream in nature.
Part of the project road from design chainage 0 to 36.500 Km, contribution of all rainwater through
tributaries are from right to left and joined in Lilri river. This Lilri river is crossing the project road at ch.
1.443 Km. A schematic diagram of Figure ES-3 shows the drainage pattern of this part duly marked on
toposheets where blue line shows the main river path, green line shows tributaries joining main river
and magenta colour line for catchment area.
Similarly, Part of the project road from design chainage 36.500 Km to 64.000 Km, country slope is from
right to left side of the project road considering increasing chainage. Only small stream lie in-between
these part where minor bridges and culverts are proposed. A schematic diagram of Figure ES-4 shows
the drainage pattern of this part duly marked on toposheets.
Similarly, last part of the project road from design chainage 64.000 Km to 116.700 Km, country slope is
from right to left side of the project road considering increasing chainage. Two main rivers namely Khari
River at ch. 71.650 Km & Mansi River at ch. 92.554 Km crossing alignment from right to left considering
increasing change where major bridges are proposed. Other than these locations minor bridges and
culverts are proposed only. A schematic diagram of Figure ES-5 shows the drainage pattern of this part
duly marked on toposheets. All figures showing drainage plan of whole stretch has been shown below.

Figure ES-3: Drainage Plan Ch. 0.000 to Ch. 36.500

Figure ES-4 : Drainage Pattern of Part road from ch. 36.500 to 64.000 Km
Figure ES-5: Drainage Pattern of Part road from ch. 64.000 to 116.700 Km (End Point)

ES.5 TRAFFIC SURVEYS AND ANALYSIS
For traffic surveys and analysis, the project road has been divided into six homogenous sections based
on the traffic flow pattern, including one count on NH-8.
The following traffic studies have been carried out:

1. Classified traffic volume counts for 7 days and 24 hours duration
2. Turning movement count survey
The traffic volume survey along the project road has been carried out in month of November 2013 and
2018. The seasonal factor has been considered for converting ADT to AADT.
Table ES-6: Traffic Survey Locations
Traffic Survey Locations - Package-2

Sl. No. Type of Survey Duration Location Date(s) of Survey
1 Classified Volume 7 Days, 24 hours km 82.000 of MDR-84 14/11/2013 to
Count Survey 20/11/2013
2 km 62.000 of MDR-84
3 Classified Volume 3 Days 24 Hours km 82.000 of MDR-84 21/11/2018 to
Count Survey: Second 23/11/2018
4 km 62.000 of MDR-84
Survey
5 TMC Survey 24 Hours km 103.640 of MDR-84 02-11-2018
6 Pedestrian/ Cattle 12 Hours km 72.000 of MDR-84 22-11-2018
crossing
7 km 55.000 of MDR-84 22-11-2018
Table ES-7: AADT
Vehicle Type Km. 82 of MDR-84 Km. 62 of MDR-84
Date Nov,’13 Nov,’18 Nov,’13 Nov,’18

Fast Moving Passenger Vehicles
Car/ Jeep/Van 310 280 692 564
Taxi 18 0 17 0
Shared Jeep 30 123 36 12
Two wheeler 1154 2029 3518 3128
3wh 29 50 82 65
Minibus 1 1 5 1
School Bus 1 1 10 6
Bus (Govt) 4 77 6 77
Bus (Pvt) 60 96
Fast Moving Commercial Vehicles
Goods Pick-Up 144 197 237 178
LCV (4 Tyre) 35 15 39 14
LCV (6 Tyre) 43 34 61 40
2-Axle 118 99 98 64
3-Axle 131 129 137 91
4 to 6 axle 109 299 104 247

Vehicle Type Km. 82 of MDR-84 Km. 62 of MDR-84
Date Nov,’13 Nov,’18 Nov,’13 Nov,’18

7 axle and above 0 0 0 0
Agricultural Vehicles
Tractor 18 8 41 16
Tractor with Trailer 42 97 56 108
Slow Moving Vehicles
Cycle 16 4 215 26
Cycle Rickshaw 0 0 0 0
Animal cart 0 0 4 0
Others 2 0 6 0
Toll Exempted Vehicles
Car/ Jeep 1 0 11 3
Bus 1 0 1 0
Truck 0 0 0 0
Total (Vehicles) 2267 3443 5472 4640
Total (PCU's) 2896 4454 4976 4817
As per the clause 2.17 of “Manual of Specifications and Standards Two Laning of Highways with Paved
Shoulders” (IRC SP 73:2015) the project road having design service volumes below 10000 PCU/day and
below 18000PCU/day shall be upgraded to Two lane with Paved shouldersand 4-lane divided
carriageway as per As per clause of MoRT&H Circular No. F.No. RW/NH-33044/37/2015/S&R® dated
the 26th May 2016.
The current scenario of projected traffic warrant for up gradation to Two Lane with Paved and
Granular shoulders for HS-2,3 (Design Ch.30+050 to Design Ch. 74+000).
ES 5.1 Road Safety Issues and Traffic Calming Measures
i. Accident Black Spot Identification and Removal

The accident data for the past 3 years was collected from the concerned police stations covering the
project road in order to identify the major accident locations and accident black spots. The accidents
are grouped into four types based on their severity. They are:
 Fatal accidents
 Grievous injury
 Minor injury
 Non-injury
Based on above parameters the hazardous locations are identified. According to the revised
definitions issued by Ministry of Road Transport & Highways (MoRTH), Government of India, Road
accident black spot is a stretch of National Highway of about 500 mt. in length in which either 5
road accidents (In all three years put together involving fatalities/grievous injuries) took place
during the last 3 calendar years or 10 fatalities (In all three years put together) took place during
the last three calendar years.

Based on the analysis of the accident data, 2 locations were identified as black spot along the project
road as given below:
a. Harnia Mangri near Badnor (17 Fatalities)

b. Para Chowk near Asind (6 Fatal Accidents)
The major road accident locations are marked in the Figure ES-6 given below and the details of the
number of accidents and the number of fatalities and grievously injured people are listed in in Table
ES-8 below.
Table ES-8: Major Accident location details
Total Fatal /
Sl Fatal Grievous Minor Total
Accident Location Grievous
No Accidents Accidents Accidents Fatalities
Accidents
1 Asan Ka Badiya_Badnor 1 1
2 Badnor 1
3 Balai Kheda 1 1 1
4 Bhagwanpura 1 1 2 1
Bhilon Ki Basti
5 1 1
Mavla_Badnor
6 Bhim Chowraha 1 1
Bijaynagar
7 2 1
Chowraha_Badnor
8 Brahmano Ki Sareri 1 1
9 Chatarpura, Badnor 2 1 3 2
10 Chotiyas Ke Pass 4 4 6
11 Dhunwala Mandal 1 1 1
Futiya Chowraha
12 1
Kornas_Asind
Ganeshpura
13 1 1
Chowraha_Mandal
Guljar Farm House
14 1
Dhuvalan_Mandal
15 Haripura Chowraha 2
Harniya Mangri
16 3 3 17
Chowraha
17 Jaswantpura 1 1
Jivliya
18 1
Chowraha_Mandal
19 Kalichat_Asind 1 1 1
20 Kornas Chowraha 2 2 2
Lakshamipura
21 1 1
Kotra_Badnor
22 Maharajpura Chowraha 1 2 3 1
23 Mandal Pond/Puliya 2 2 2
24 Mawla 1 1 1
25 Mor ka Nimbahera 2 1 3 2 2
26 Mothi / Ojiyana /Rela 2 2 4 1 2

Total Fatal /
Sl Fatal Grievous Minor Total
Accident Location Grievous
No Accidents Accidents Accidents Fatalities
Accidents
Chowraha
27 Para Chowraha 6 2 8 6
28 Peepli ka Wadiya 1 1 1
Rajiyavash Sahpura
29 1 1
Chowraha
30 Sabalsagar_Badnor 5 4
Sarhad
31 1 2
Sidiyash_Mandal
32 Sopura 1 1 2 2
33 Jagatiya Mor Ras
34 Babra Bus Stand Segregated accident data not available in police records
35 Bhagatpura, Ras 19 Accidents, 22 Fatalities, 10 Injured
36 Kolpura School
It has been observed that most of the accident locations are near curved sections of the project road
and near intersections. 3 fatal accidents took place near the first blackspot location of Harniya Mangri
Chowraha near Badnor which claimed the lives of 17 people. 6 fatal accidents and 2 grievous accidents
took place at the second black spot location of Para Chowraha near New Parasoli which claimed the
lives of 6 people and leaving 2 people seriously injured.

Figure ES-6: Accident Black Spot Location Map
Remedies and Improvements for Black Spot Removal
 Majority of the accidents have occurred near the intersections and curved sections. So, all the
intersections are design according to the standards specified in the MORTH Type Design for
Intersections on National Highways.

Harnia Mangri near Badnor (17 Fatalities) – Alignment geometry is improved by providing
horizontal curve of Radius 240m with appropriate super elevation which provides user to travel
at a design speed of 80kmph safely.
Para Chowk Near Asind - The accidents took place due to improper design of intersections. The
junction improvement is now proposed as per the standard radius and elements defined in
MORTH’s standard Type Design for Intersections on National Highway.
 Adequate quantity of sign boards, markings and other control and cautionary devices will be
installed along the corridor especially near junctions and curved sections.
 The signs should will be invariably of retro-reflective and standard type helping the road users
in the night.
 The drivers may tend to increase the speed, hence necessary sign boards at proper intervals will
be erected warning about the changes on course of road, speed restriction, other hazards etc.
 Pedestrian activities along the project corridor, majorly in urban areas and near major
intersections will be taken care by providing sign boards and zebra crossings at junctions.
 All the blind spots should be removed or rectified by realignment of the highway or by clearing
the obstructions leading to lack of visibility.
 Bypasses and realignments are proposed to avoid major settlements were pedestrian vehicle
conflicts are common.
ii. Road User Safety Solutions
a) Highway Design: Geometry of the road will be designed as per the applicable Design speed
and relevant codes and standards. The deficient curves (horizontal and vertical) along the
existing geometry will be improved. Super elevation as per the curve radius will be provided
in order to avoid overturning of vehicles due to speed.
Adequate sight distances will be provided in order to avoid blind spots both horizontally and
vertically.
b) Road Signs: As per the applicability and requirement Road signs will be place all along the
road in order to guide the road user to traverse safely. A combination of road signs like
Mandatory – Regulatory signs, Cautionary-Warning signs and Informatory signs will be
installed. Variable Message signs will also be placed at identified locations in order to inform
road user about various details like climatic conditions ahead, diversions, accident zones,
speed reduction zones etc.
c) Traffic Lights / Signals: Traffic signals will be generally installed at intersections to control
the movement of vehicles. All traffic must move in conformity with the traffic lights or
signals. Traffic Signals, Pedestrian Signals and Lane Marking signals,
d) Pavement Markings: Pavement markings will be provided to delineate the centre of road,
identify travel lane, define road edge. Pavement markings also provide information about
special lane use. Markings can also be in the form of patterns, arrows, or other devices set
into or attached to the carriageway or kerbs or to objects within or adjacent to the
carriageway, for control, warning, guidance or information of road users.

iii. Pedestrian Safety
1) Pedestrian Signals
Pedestrian Signals will be installed at the urban locations where pedestrian movement is
heavy.
At crossings with medium pedestrian crossings a push button traffic light can be installed.
Pedestrians can push the button and wait for the light to turn green and then move on and
cross cautiously.
2) Guard Rails and Lighting

Pedestrian Guard Rails will be installed at the following locations.
a) Hazardous locations on Straight Sections: In particularly busy reaches where the road is
congested and vehicles move at a fast pace, guard rails should be provided on both sides
of the carriageway so as to channelize the pedestrian on to the planned crossing
locations.
b) At Junctions/Intersections: Railing barriers will be provided to prevent people from
crossing the junctions diagonally at signalised intersections. The barrier must open only
at planned crossing facility (at zebra crossing). At Signalised junctions’ sufficient length
of guard rail will be provided to guide the pedestrian to the neared planned pedestrian
crossing.
c) School Colleges: Guard rails will be provided near schools in order to prevent childrens
to run straight into the road.
d) Bus Stops, Railway Stations, Temple etc: Guard rails will be provided alongside walks
with suitable access at bus stops, railway stations and other areas of heavy pedestrian
activity such as cinema houses, stadiums etc.
e) Overpass, Subway etc.:Guard rails is to be provided at Overpasses and subways in order
to compel the pedestrians to use the facilities provided for them.
3) Pedestrian Crossings
a) Zebra Crossings: Zebra crossings will be provided along with stop lines as per IRC 35 for
safe crossing of pedestrians.
b) Hump Subways: Hump subways are provided by providing the subway partially under
ground and partially over the ground in order to reduce the walking length.
c) Full Subways: Full subways are provided by providing the subway fully under the ground.
d) Foot Overbridge: FOB will be provided where there are space constraints and heavy
pedestrian movement.
4) Footpath
Footpath with Kerb and pedestrian guard rail will be proposed continuously throughout the
urban and built-up sections in order to provide a safe passage for pedestrians to walk along
the traffic.
Road Safety Schedule and Traffic Calming Measures:
Detailed Road Safety Schedule and Traffic Calming Measures are provided in the form of
Annexures. The schedule contains the provision and locations of Road Markings and Road
Signs for all the Major Junctions, Minor Junctions, Schools, Temples, Govt. Offices,other
community buildings etc.

ES 6 ENGINEERING DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT PROPOSALS
ES 6.1 Design Standards
The design standards for the project road have been set from IRC SP 73-2015 “Manual of Specifications
and Standards for Two-Laning of Highways with Paved shoulders” and IRC SP 84-2019 “Manual of
Specifications and Standards for Four-Laning of Highways through public private partnership.
The project road is proposed for improvement two lanes with paved and granular shoulders and 4-lane
with design speed of 80-100 kmph in rural areas, and 30 kmph in stretches passing through forest and
built up areas.
ES 6.2 Geometric Improvements
Concentric widening is adopted to restrict land acquisition to minimum. The existing geometry has
many sharp curves and many sections requiring geometric improvement. The deficient sections have
been improved to design standards.
Table ES-9: Existing and Proposed project length
Chainage (Km) Existing Length

Project Alignment
From To (Km)
103.570 (of MDR-84) 53.448 50.122 MDR-84
Existing Length 50.122 km
Proposed Project Length with improvement 43.950 km
ES 6.3 Proposal of Bypasses
Bypasses have been proposed for 3 enroute villages where geometrics are not possible to improve
within available ROW. Different alternative are analyzed before finalizing the alignment for bypasses.
The list of bypasses villages and are given in Table ES.10. The improvement proposals are detailed in
Chapter-7.
Table ES-10: Proposed Bypasses
Existing Design
Existing Chainage Design Chainage Type of
Sl. No. Length Length Bypass
Road
Start End (m) Start End (m)
NIL
ES 6.4 Proposal of Realignment
Following are the major realignments proposed to improve the geometry, where existing geometrics
are not possible to improve to design standards, with in available ROW. Re-alignment have been
proposed for 7 enroute villages, where geometrics are possible to improve. Total 20 nos. realignments
are proposed enhance the existing geometrics. The list of realignment for villages and realignments for
curve improvement are given in Table ES.11 respectively. The improvement proposals are detailed in
Chapter-7.

Table ES-11: Proposed Realignments
Sl. Existing Chainage Design Chainage Length Village

No From To From To
1 102980 100260 30650 33500 2850 Rajiyawas
2 100062 99583 33775 34254 479
3 99495 99224 34342 34613 271
4 98283 97537 35365 35800 435
5 97292 95672 36045 37100 1055 Pipali Bariya
6 94143 93393 38511 39057 546
7 93316 92921 39134 39500 366
8 89119 88022 43000 44000 1000 Hira Bariya
9 87623 87121 44300 45000 700
10 86381 85592 45740 46514 774
11 85076 83369 47030 48630 1600 Kaniyakhera & Kotra
12 82399 81106 49600 50600 1000 Ojiyana
13 77781 77625 54094 54250 156
14 75468 75128 56400 56740 340
15 74865 74645 57000 57220 220
16 73912 71560 57950 59770 1820 Badnor
17 70358 70067 60710 61000 290
18 66582 66262 64500 64820 320
19 65200 64940 65850 66150 300
20 57969 54827 70020 72625 2605 Asind
Total 17127
ES 6.5 Improvement Proposal
The proposed Cross-section of th project road are present in below Table ES-12.
Table ES-12: Improvement proposal widening Scheme
Sl. Design Chainage (m) Design

Improvement proposal for widening
No From To Length (m)
1 30050 30650 600 Widening / Reconstruction with flexible pavement
2 30650 31670 1020 New construction with flexible pavement
8 39300 39650 350 Toll Plaza

Sl. Design Chainage (m) Design

Improvement proposal for widening
No From To Length (m)
22 60250 61350 1100 Flyover Approach with Retaining Structure And Service Road
Two lane carriageway with service road
25 70850 71400 550
(Newconstruction/Reconsrtuction)
28 71685 71835 150 At Major Bridge
Table ES-13: Summary of widening Scheme
Sr No. Improvement Type Length (m)

1 2 lane with paved shoulder
Overlay 0
New Construction 8905
Reconstruction 31745
Two lane with service road 550
ROB/VUP approach with Flexible pavement 2250
Major Bridges and RoB’s 150
Toll plaza 350
Total 43950
2 Total project length (km) 43.950
ES 6.5 Junction Improvements
The major intersections / junctions, Minor junction,Busbay& shelter, Truck Bay and Toll plaza at the are
proposed for improvement as per IRC SP-41 guidelines and Type Designs for Intersections on National
Highways.
Table ES-14: Improvement proposal
Number of Remarks
Sr No Type of intersection
improvement
1 Major intersection 15

Number of Remarks
Sr No Type of intersection
improvement
2 Minor intersection 54
3 Bus Bay 14
4 Bus shelter 06
5 Truck Bay 1 61+100(LHS)
6 Wayside Amenities 1 67+700(LHS)
ES 6.5 Toll Plaza
Two toll plazas are proposed along the project at the locations given below:
Table ES-15: Proposed Toll Plazas
Sl. Applicable
Location Tollable section Remark (Traffic Adopted)
No. Length (km)
Toll plaza 2 km 30.050 to km
1 43.950 km 82.000 of MDR-84
(Km 39.475) 74.000
Total Tollable Length(km) 43.950
ES.7 PAVEMENT DESIGN
Pavement design for new and reconstruction of carriageway carried out as per guidelines of IRC: 37-
2018 and IRC-58-2015. Table ES.16 provides the summary of the new construction or widening
&reconstruction with flexible pavement (Reconstruction is to be considered from Subgrade top) for
section –II,III,IV)which is 2 lane with paved shoulder.
Table ES-16: Proposed Flexible Pavement Design
Option-4 Foamed Bitumen/Bitumen Emulsion Treated RAP/Aggregate Over Cemented Sub Base
Proposed Crust Composition (mm)
HS-II 30.050 to 60.800 HS-III 60.800 to 96.000
Design CBR (%) 6% 6%
Design MSA 30 30
Grade of Bitumen VG-40 VG-40
BC 40 40
DBM 60 60
RAP 110 110
CTSB 200 200
Total thickness (mm) 410 410
ES.8 IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL FOR STRUCTURES
One new major bridges are proposed on project road. Out of Five minor bridges one is proposed for
repair and widening, three are proposed for reconstruction and remaining one is proposed as new
structures. Total 97 numbers of culverts are proposed including pipe and box culverts. New pdestrain
subway has also been proposed as desired location.

Table ES-17: Summary of Improvement Proposal for Structures
Retained
SR. Type of proposed Repair & New Total
with Reconstruction
NO. structure Widening Structures Structures
Repair
1 MJB 0 0 0 1 1
2 MNB 0 1 3 1 5
3 Pipe 0 5 42 0 47
4 Slab 0 0 0 0 0
5 Box 0 3 27 20 50
6 ROB 0 0 0 0 0
7 VUP 0 0 0 0 0
8 VUP Grade-II 0 0 0 4 4
9 Pedestrian Subway 0 0 0 1 1
Total 0 9 72 27 108
ES.9 COST ESTIMATE
Cost estimation is important for the feasibility study as it provides vital input to the economic and
financial evaluation of the project. The estimate has been prepared for strengthening & widening the
existing stretches to two lane with paved and granular shoulders (Package 2): Ch. 30+050 to Ch.74+000
as proposed. Quantities for all the structures are calculated separately to arrive cost. The summary of
the Cost Estimate for two lane with paved and granular shoulders (Package 2) is given below in Table ES
18.

Table ES 18: Summary of Cost Estimate for Ch. 30+050 to Ch. 74+000 (Package-2)
Sr. Amount
Particulars Amount (INR)
No. (Cr.)
1 Site clearance and Dismanteling 8,76,30,795 8.76
2 Earth Work 20,81,17,899 20.81
Grannular Sub Base Courses and Base Courses ( Non-
3 15,70,30,976 15.70
Bituminous )
4 Bituminous Courses 41,35,97,476 41.36
5 Culverts 9,63,63,904 9.64
6 Bridges
a) Minor Bridges 3,56,92,588 3.57
b) Major Bridges 5,03,67,690 5.04
c) FO, ROB 0 0.00
d) VUP/PUP 1,83,49,497 1.83
e) Repair and Rehabilitation of bridges and culverts 1,54,012 0.02
f) RE Wall, Retaining Wall, Boundary Wall 23,13,82,320 23.14
7 Drainage & Protective Works 9,54,69,065 9.55
8 Junctions 9,20,44,494 9.20
9 Traffic signs, Road markings and other road appurtunences 4,91,84,492 4.92
10 Miscellaneous Works 13,17,03,814 13.17
11 Maintenance of roads 1,66,34,480 1.66
12 Toll Plaza 3,58,05,300 3.58
Total Civil Construction Cost Excluding GST (A) 1,71,95,28,801 171.95

Civil Construction Cost Per Km 3,91,24,660 3.91
GST (7% of A) 12,03,67,016 12.04
Total Civil Construction Cost Including GST 1,83,98,95,817 183.98

ES.10 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Economic analysis indicates that, project EIRR is well above 12%, hence the project is economically
viable and strongly recommended for upgradation to two lane with paved and granular shoulders.
Based on the financial analysis, it is inferred that the Equity IRR for the project is not achieving
the desired benchmark of 15%. The project is not viable on PPP (Toll) mode of implementation
at maximum allowed grant of 40%, as equity IRR and Project IRR worked out as 5.35% for
Package-II.
ES.11 RECOMMENDATIONS
The project EIRR is well above the targeted 12%, Package – II is for upgradation to 2 lane with paved
shoulder. As the project FIRR is well below targeted 15%, hence recommend for implementation under
EPC mode.

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
Ministry of Road Transport & Highways (MORT&H) “the Authority” is engaged in the development of
National Highways and as part of this endeavour, the Authority has decided to upgrade Ras - Beawar-
Asind - Mandal section of NH-158 in the state of Rajasthan.
The National highways Authority of India (NHAI) has appointed M/s. Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd. for
providing the required consultancy services for preparation of Feasibility Report cum Preliminary Design
for up gradation of Ras-Beawar-Asind-Mandal section of NH 158, in the state of Rajasthan on
Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) basis.
NHAI Delhi through their letter NHAI/RJ/11019/BOT/DPR/NH-158/2013/3718 dated 25.09.2013

instructed the consultants to commence the Assignment, and the project activities thereafter.The
Contract agreement for the assignment was signed on 24th September 2013. In 11th November 2014,
Project Authority is transferred from NHAI to Public Works Department, NH Division, Rajasthan, through
tripartite agreement.
The scope of the project is to establish the technical, economic and financial viability of the project and
prepare Feasibility Report cum Preliminary Design for up-gradation of Ras-Beawar-Asind-Mandal
Section of NH-158 in the state of Rajasthan.
The Inception report, Report on first alignment and Traffic Survey, Draft Feasibility Reportand Final
Feasibility Report cum Preliminary Design Report” is submitted to Authority.Later on directions were
received from office of the executive engineer PWD NH Div Pali vide letter no. 1589 dated 31-08-
2018. Based on this modifications are taken up in the present report which is termed as “Final
Feasibility Report cum Preliminary Design Report” as described in TOR.
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND ALIGNMENT
The project road is one of the most recently declared National Highways by MORT&H in the State of
Rajasthan. The project road under consideration is declared as National Highway in January 2013.
The project road (NH-158), before converting into National Highway comprises of SH-39 (Ras to
Beawar), Shree Cement Road, part of NH-8 (Beawar), MDR-84 and SH-61.
After series of discussions with Client, while finalizing alignment, considering existing Highways around
Beawar, the Shree Cement Road is dropped from this project, by providing the bypass on south western
part of Beawar. The movement of traffic and existing bypass to Beawar also considered in finalizing the
alignment.The detailed inventory and analysis of NH-14 bypass and NH-8 is also excluded from this
report as these sections forming part of project highway for connectivity isalready developed and under
operation by NHAI. Figure 1-2 shows changes made to alignment i.e. NH declared as per Gazette
notification and project section included in this report.
Project road starts from Ras and ends near Mandal connecting to NH-48. Approximate length of the
project road is 134km traversing Beawar, Asind,Badnor& Mandal. Figure 1-1 shows key map of the
project road.Project road is located in Pali, Ajmer, Rajsamand and Beawar districts of Rajasthan.
The State of Rajasthan is located in north-western part of India. Rajasthan is surrounded on the west
and northwest by Pakistan, on the north and northeast by the states of Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd 1-1 Public Works Department, Rajasthan

Pradesh, on the east and southeast by the states of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, and on the
southwest by the state of Gujarat. The project road is located in Pali, Ajmer, Rajasamand and Bhilwara
districts of Rajasthan.

Feasibility Report cum Preliminary design for upgradation of NH-158 connecting to Ras-Beawar-Mandal in Final Feasibility cum
the state of Rajasthan (Package-II) Preliminary Design Report
Figure 1-1: Project Key Map

Figure 1-2: Proposed Changes in the Alignment Plan

1.3 ESTABLISHMENT
The date of signing of the contract is 24th September 2013 and the date of commencement of our
service is 30th September 2013.
1.4 PROJECT APPRECIATION
Rajasthan, situated at the north-western part of India is the biggest state in the country of India and lies
between 230 30’ and 300 11’ North latitude and 690 29’ and 780 17’ East longitudes. The state shares its
north-western and western boundary with the Indo-Pakistan international border that extends about
1,070 km and touches the major districts Barmer, Bikaner, Ganganagar and Jaisalmer. Rajasthan is
bordered by Pakistan in the west and northwest, the states of Punjab, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana in the
north and northeast. The state of Madhya Pradesh lies in the southeast and Gujarat in the southwest.
The huge portion of the state of Rajasthan is desiccated and houses the biggest Indian desert called the
Thar Desert and better known as the 'Maru-kantar'. The oldest chain of fold mountains - the Aravalli
Range splits the state into two geographical zones - desert at one side and forest belt on the other. Only
9.36% of the total geographical region lies under forest vegetation.
The Aravalli Range literally meaning 'line of peaks' , is a range of mountains in western India running
approximately 800 km from northeast to southwest across states of Rajasthan, Haryana, and Gujarat.
The Aravali Range runs across the state from the southwest peak Guru Shikhar (Mount Abu), which is
1,722 m in height, to Khetri in the northeast. This divides the state into 60% in the northwest of the
range and 40% in the southeast. The northwest tract is sandy and unproductive with little water but
improves gradually from desert land in the far west and northwest to comparatively fertile and
habitable land towards the east.
The Thar Desert of Rajasthan is situated partly in India and partly in Pakistan. Bordering the desert on
four sides are, Indus plains to the west, Aravalli Range to the southeast, Rann of Kutch to the south, and
Punjab plains to the north and northeast.
Weather in Rajasthan varies with the seasons of the year. The weather in Rajasthan ranges from very
hot in summer to chilly in winter. Like its varying topography, Rajasthan has varying climate. The
weather or climate of the Rajasthan can be broadly classified into four distinct seasons. They are - Pre-
monsoon, which is the hot season preceding the monsoon and extends from April to June, the
Monsoon that occurs in the month of June in the eastern region and mid- July in the western arid
regions, the Post-monsoon that commences from mid-September and continues till November and the
Winter that extends from December to March, January being the coldest month of the year. The
average temperature in winter ranges from 8° to 28° C (46° to 82° F) and in summer the average
temperature range from 25° to 46° C (77° to 115° F).
1.5 THE DISTRICT
The project road is situated in Pali, Ajmer, Rajasamand, and Bhilwara districts. The brief details about
the district are as below:
1.5.1 Pali District:
Pali is a district of the state of Rajasthan in westernIndia. Pali is Rajput Dominated district. The town
of Pali is the district headquarters. The Aravalli Range forms the eastern boundary of the district and
towards southern boundary it ends at Bamner village inSumerpur Tehsil. A zone of foothills lies to the

west, through which run the many tributaries of the Luni River. The western portion of the district
includes the alluvial plain of the Luni. It is bounded by eight districts, Nagaur District to the north, Ajmer
District to the northeast, Rajsamand District to the east, Udaipur District to the southeast, Sirohi
District to the southwest, Jalore District and Barmer District to the west, and Jodhpur District to the
northwest. The major part of the district has elevations ranging from 200 to 300 m above MSL, but in
the east toward the Aravalli Range the elevation increases and the average is nearer 600 m and at some
places the elevations exceed 1000 m
According to the 2011 census Pali district has a population of 2,038,533.The district has a population
density of 165 inhabitants per square kilometer (430/sq mi) .Its population growth rate over the decade
2001–2011 was 11.99%.Pali has a sex ratio of 987 females for every 1000 males, and a literacy rate of
63.23%.
1.5.2 Ajmer District
Ajmer District is a district of the state of Rajasthan in western India. The city of Ajmer is the district
headquarters. Ajmer District has an area of 8,481 km² and a population of 2,180,526 (2001 census).
Three main religions are; Hindu 1,869,044, Muslim 244,341, Jains 47,812. The district is situated in the
center of Rajasthan, and is bounded by Nagaur District to the north, Jaipur and Tonk districts to the
east, Bhilwara District to the south, and Pali District to the west.
The eastern portion of the district is generally flat, broken only by gentle undulations. The e western
parts, from north-west to south-west, are intersected by the Aravalli Range. Many of the valleys in this
region are sandy deserts, part of India's Thar Desert, with an occasional oasis of cultivation. Some fertile
tracts are also present; among these is the plain on which lies the town of Ajmer. This valley has an
artificial lake, and is protected by the massive walls of the Nagpathar range or Serpent rock, which
forms a barrier against the sand. The only hills in the district are the Aravalli Range and its offshoots.
Ajmer is almost totally devoid of rivers. The Banas River touches the south-eastern boundary of the
district so as to irrigate the pargana of Samur. Four small streams - the Sagarmati, Saraswati, Khari and
Dai also intersect the district.
The district is divided into four subdivisions, Ajmer, Beawar, Kekri and Kishangarh, and further
subdivided into six tehsils, Ajmer, Beawar,Nasirabad, India, Kekri, Kishangarh.
According to the 2011 census Ajmer district has a population of 2, 584. This gives it a ranking of 161st in
India (out of a total of 640). The district has a population density of 305 inhabitants per square
kilometre (790 /sq miles population growth rate over the decade 2001-2011 was 18.48%. Ajmer has
a sex ratio of 950 females for every 1000 males, and a literacy rate of 70.46% (District Census-2011).
1.5.3 Rajsamand District:
Rajsamand District is a district of the state ofRajasthan in western India. The town of Rajsamand is the
district headquarters. The city and district are named for Rajsamand Lake, an artificial lake created in
the 17th century by Rana Raj Singh of Mewar. The district had been constituted on 10 April 1991
from Udaipur district.
The district has an area of 4,768 km². The Aravalli Range forms the northwestern boundary of the
district, across which lies Pali District. Ajmer District lies to the north, Bhilwara District to the northeast
and east, Chittorgarh District to the southeast, and Udaipur District to the south. The district lies in the
watershed of the Banas River and its tributaries. Some other rivers are: Ari, Gomati, Chandra and
Bhoga. According to the 2011 census Rajsamand district has a population of 1,158,283, The district has

a population density of 302 inhabitants per square kilometer (780/sq mi) .Its population growth
rate over the decade 2001-2011 was 17.35%. Rajsamand has a sex ratio of 988 females for every 1000
males, and a literacy rate of 63.93%.
1.5.4 Bhilwara District
Bhilwara District is a district of the state of Rajasthan in western India. The town of Bhilwara is the
district headquarters.
The district has an area of 10,455 km², and a population of 2,009,516 (2001 census), which increased
26.14% from 1991 to 2001. It is bounded on the north by Ajmer District, on the east by Bundi District,
on the south by Chittorgarh District, and on the west by Rajasamand District. State Highway (Jaipur-
Udaipur) passes through the district, as does a broad gauge railway line measuring 84 km and
connecting Ajmer with Khandwa in Madhya Pradesh. The nearest airport is at Udaipur (171 km).
There are 7 sub-divisions in the district namely Bhilwara, Shahpura, Gangapur, Gulabpura, Asind,
Mandalgarh and Jahazpur. Under these sub-divisions there are 15 Tehsils namely, Bhilwara, Banera,
Mandal, Mandalgarh, Beejoliya, Kotri, Shahpura, Jahazpur, Sahada, Raipur, Asind, Hurda. Fuliyakalan,
Sahada, Badnor There are four Sub Tehsils also named Kareda (Mandal), Badnor (Asind), Hamirgarh
(Bhilwara) and Puliakalan (Shahpura). Similarly there are 1783 villages as per census of 2001.
According to the 2011 census Bhilwara district has a population of 2,410,459, roughly equal to the
nation of Kuwait or the US state of New Mexico. This gives it a ranking of 184th in India (out of a total of
640). The district has a population density of 230 inhabitants per square kilometre (600 /sq mi).
Its population growth rate over the decade 2001-2011 was 19.7%. Bhilwara has a sex ratio of
969 females for every 1000 males, and a literacy rate of 62.71%.
The District Bhilwara has a hot dry summer and bracing cold winter. The cold season is from December
to February and is followed by hot summers from March to the last week of June. The south west
Monsoon season which follows, last till about mid September. The period from mid September to about
the end of November constitutes the post monsoon season.
1.6 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
As per the TOR, the objectives and scope to services are given below:
1.6.1 Objective of Services
The main objective of the consultancy service is to establish the technical, economical, and financial
viability of the project and prepare Feasibility and Preparation of Detailed Project Report for
Rehabilitation and upgradation of existing road to two lanes with paved shoulders configuration/four
lane, with objective of
I. enhanced safety and level of service for the road users;
II. superior operation and maintenance enabling enhanced operational efficiency of the Project
Highway;
III. minimal adverse impact on the local population and road users due to road construction;
IV. minimal adverse impact on environment;
V. minimal additional acquisition of land; and
VI. Phased development of the Project Highway for improving its financial viability consistent with
the need to minimize frequent inconvenience to traffic that may be caused if additional works

are undertaken within a period of seven years from the commencement of construction of the
Project Highway.
1.6.2 Scope of Services
Consultant will follow the scope of work as stipulated by the client. The general scope of work for this
study comprises the following:
2.1.1 Traffic surveys and demand assessment

2.1.2 Engineering surveys and investigations
2.1.3 Location and layout of toll plazas
2.1.4 Location and layout of truck lay byes
2.1.5 Location and layout of bus bays and bus shelters
2.1.6 Social impact assessment
2.1.7 Environment impact assessment
2.1.8 Preliminary designs of road, bridges, structures, etc.
2.1.9 Preparation of Land Plan Schedules and Utility Relocation Plans
2.1.10 Preparation of indicative BOQ and rough Cost Estimates
2.1.11 Preparation of Schedules A, B, C, D, H and I of the Contract Agreement
1.7 CONTENTS OF SUBMISSION
The submission constitutes four volumes. The first volume designated as “Volume I – Final Feasibility
cum Preliminary Design Report” includes details of surveys & investigations, traffic analysis and project
sections, improvement proposals, designs & cost estimates. The second volume “Volume IA– Annexure
to Final Feasibility Report cum Preliminary Design Report” contains all the calculations supporting to
Volume-I. Volume - I B Detailed Cost Estimate and the Fourth volume termed as “Volume-II – Drawings
Volume” includes Plan & Profile Drawings, and other drawings indicated in Volume-I, Volume-III
constitutes drawings for GAD of structures.

2 INVENTORY OF PROJECT ROAD
2.1 ROAD ALIGNMENT
The project road (NH-158), before converting National Highway comprises of partly with SH-39 (Ras to
Beawar), Shree Cement Road, part of NH-8 (Beawar), MDR-84 and SH-61.
However the Shree Cement Road is excluded from this project, as the alignment is traversing from SH-
39 to NH-14 bypass on south western part of Beawar as described in Section 1.2.
The road inventory for sections of NH-8 and NH-14 bypass is also excluded from the project report as
these sections overlaps with proposed project highway which are already developed and under
operation by NHAI.
The project road starts at km 129.000 (SH-39) at Ras and ends at km 10.940 (SH-61) near Mandal
connecting to NH-48. The project stretch passes through Pali, Ajmer, Rajsamand and Bhilwara districts
of Rajasthan. Project road passes through important towns/villages like Ras, Jagatiya, Bhagatpura,
Babra, Roopnagar, Beawar, Laxmipura, Nimba Hera, Asind, Badnor and Mandal. Total length of this
existing link is about 134.000 kms including overlap section. The project stretch traverses through
rolling and hilly terrain and have mostly poor geometry except few locations where curve improvement
may not be required. The existing alignment details are given in Table 2-1. The existing length project
road is km 115.020 excluding the overlapping sections of NH-8, and Shree Cement road and about 134
kms including overlapping sections.
Table 2-1: Existing Alignment Details
Chainage (Km) Project

Length (Km) Remarks
From To Alignment
At Km 149.000 there is
129.000/ 148.660 73.000 19.660 SH-39
another km stone showing 73
73.000 75.660 2.660 SH-39
103.570 (of MDR-84) 30.000 73.640 MDR-84
30.000 (of MDR-84 10.940 19.060 SH-61 connect
and SH-61) (SH-61) to NH-79
115.020
Existing Alignment Details – Package-2

Chainage (Km)
Length (Km) Project Alignment Remarks
From To
103.570 (of MDR-84) 53.448 50.192 MDR-84
50.192
Exhibits showing start and end points of the project road are given below;

Project Road at Km 129.250 of SH-39 at Ras Project Stretch at 10.640 of SH-61 at Mandal
Terrain
The terrain along the projects road is predominantly rolling and plain except few sections having hilly
terrain. Some exhibits of the existing terrain along the project road are shown belowTable 2-2;
Table 2-2: Terrain
Sl. No. Road From To Terrain Length (Km)

1 MDR-84 103.570 80.000 Rolling 23.640
2 MDR-84 80.000 76.000 Plain 4.000
3 MDR-84 76.000 57.900 Rolling 18.100
4 MDR-84 57.900 53.448 Plain 4.452
Total 50.192
Hilly Terrain 89.000 (MDR-84)
Figure 2-1: Terrain
2.2 LAND USE
The observed land use pattern along the project road is mainly barren,agricultural and urban. The
barren and agricultural land constitutes about 68-72%, 9-12% and 19-20% respectively from Beawar-
Mandal. Table 2-3 gives the details of land use along the project road.

Table 2-3: Land Use
Land Use LHS RHS

MDR-84 and SH-61 ( Beawar-Mandal)
Agricultural 12% 9%
Built Up 20% 19%
Barren 68% 72%
The following sections of the project highway are passing through the Forest Area which is given in
Table 2-4 below:
Table 2-4: Forest Area
Forest Details From To Remarks

MDR-84 (Mandal- Asind Section) 89/100 91/900 Reserve Forest
2.3 CARRIAGEWAY
The present carriageway configuration varies from single lane to two lanes with earthen shoulders.
Summary of existing carriageway width details are given in Table 2-5. The detailed road inventory is
given in Annexure 2.1 of Volume-IA.
Table 2-5: Width of Carriageway
Chainage (Km)
Carriageway Width (m) Remarks
From To Total
103.570 (of MDR-84) 103.600 0.030 5.40
103.600 102.000 1.60 4.10
102.000 102.700 0.70 4.10
102.700 101.000 1.70 3.80
101.000 100.000 1.00 3.80
100.000 100.700 0.70 5.50
100.700 99.000 1.70 6.00
99.000 98.000 1.00 6.00
97.000 90.000 7.00 3.50
90.000 89.500 0.50 6.50 MDR-84
89.500 82.000 7.50 3.50
82.000 79.000 3.00 5.70
79.000 77.000 2.00 7.00
77.000 67.000 10.00 7.00
67.000 63.000 4.00 6.90
63.000 63.500 0.50 5.00
63.500 61.000 2.50 4.30
61.000 59.000 2.00 4.50
59.000 53.448 5.55 7.10
The existing carriageway is flexible, with exception of rigid pavements as given in Table 2-6.

Table 2-6: Sections with Rigid Pavement
Chainage
Sl. No. Total Length (km)
From To
1 33+534 34+033 0.499
2 39+028 39+918 0.890
3 43+146 43+172 0.026
4 43+195 43+269 0.074
5 49+037 49+058 0.021
6 55+495 55+580 0.085
7 55+786 55+960 0.174
8 56+042 56+089 0.047
9 56+410 56+462 0.052
10 56+683 56+756 0.073
11 57+124 57+412 0.288
12 58+749 58+940 0.191
13 59+055 59+168 0.113
14 62+473 62+640 0.167
15 62+726 62+842 0.116
16 71+520 71+720 0.200
17 71+890 72+817 0.927
2.4 SHOULDERS
The width of shouldersis varying from 0.000 to 1.200m. Shoulders are in fair to poor condition in most
of the project length.
2.5 BUILT-UP SECTION/ URBAN SETTLEMENTS
The major settlements along the project road are Ras, Beawar, Badnor, Asind and Mandal. However the
enroute villages identified along the project road is given in Table 2-7. Few of the built-up areas are
shown in Figure 2-3.
Table 2-7: List of Major Built-up & Settlements along the project road. Package-2
Chainage (Km) Length Name of the

Sl. No Remarks
From To (Km) Village/Town
1. 93/500 91/300 2.20 Jaswant Pur Village
2. 88/100 88/300 0.20 Barr Village
3. 82/000 80/100 1.90 Laxmipura Village
4. 80/800 79/700 1.10 Ojiyana Village
MDR-84
5. 77/500 77/200 0.30 Mawla Village
6. 72/900 71/100 1.80 Badnor Village
7. 59/500 58/600 0.90 Pratapura Village
8. 58/000 54/000 4.00 Asind

Km 71.000 of MDR-84 - Badnor Built-up Area Badnor 73+100
Figure 2-2: Built-up Areas
2.6 INTERSECTIONS / JUNCTIONS
major junctions are observed along the project road with NH are given in Table 2-8.
Table 2-8 : List of Major Junctions
Sl. No. Side Chainage Cross Road Type

1 103.56 (MDR-84) NH-8 T
Note: Ras-Mandal is considered as forward direction all along.
List of minor junctions observed along the project road are given in Table 2-9.
Table 2-9: List of Minor Junctions
EXISTING CHAINAGE TYPE OF PAVEMENT TYPE OF JUNCTION DIRECTION

99.480 BT T LHS
99.460 BT T RHS
98.720 BT T RHS
98.360 BT + BOTH
97.308 BT T LHS
96.490 BT T RHS
96.390 BT T RHS
94.320 BT T LHS
93.377 BT T LHS
89.500 BT T RHS
88.540 BT T LHS
87.180 BT T RHS
84.813 BT T LHS
83.350 BT
81.490 BT T
79.520 BT + BOTH
77.710 BT T RHS
72.910 BT T RHS

EXISTING CHAINAGE TYPE OF PAVEMENT TYPE OF JUNCTION DIRECTION
72.330 BT K LHS
70.260 BT T LHS
70.210 BT T LHS
69.575 BT T LHS
64.522 BT T RHS
63.120 BT T RHS
62.510 BT T RHS
60.980 BT T LHS
60.500 BT T RHS
59.190 BT T LHS
59.100 BT T RHS
58.950 BT T RHS
58.740 BT T RHS
58.49 CC T RHS
57.490 BT T RHS
57.450 BT T LHS
57.425 BT T RHS
57.397 CC T RHS
57.357 CC T LHS
57.352 CC T RHS
57.300 BT T LHS
56.710 CC T RHS
56.670 BT T LHS
56.650 BT T RHS
56.580 BT T LHS
56.445 CC + BOTH
56.265 CC T LHS
56.195 CC T LHS
56.165 CC T LHS
56.120 BT +
55.930 BT T LHS
55.80 BT T LHS
55.787 BT T LHS
55.620 BT T LHS
55.555 CC T RHS
55.520 CC T LHS
54.450 CC T RHS
54.430 CC T RHS
54.410 BT T RHS
54.320 CC T RHS
54.265 BT T RHS
54.257 CC T RHS
54.270 CC T RHS
54.130 BT T RHS

2.7 EXISTING HIGHWAY STRUCTURES
Detailed inventory and condition surveys for cross drainage structures are carried out, through pre-
defined format. In total one major bridge, one ROB, 14 minor Bridges, 81 slab culverts, 140 pipe
culverts, 2 causeways are found along the project highway under consideration for the development.
a. Pipe Culverts
Mainly there are two types of culverts i.e. slab culvert & hume pipe culverts are found along the project
road. Most of the pipe culverts is having dia less than or equal to 0.6 m, needs reconstruction as per
“Manual of Specifications and Standards for Two Laning of Highways with Paved Shoulder”. The
structural condition of most of the culverts is generally fair to poor. Poor maintenance has led to
improper functioning of the culverts. Adequate maintenance of the culverts in many areas can result in
proper functioning of the culverts. The detailed inventory of culverts is given in Annexure 3-4 of
Volume-IA.
Table 2-10: Pipe Culverts
Existing Chainage Total width Carriage way

Sl. No Nos Span/Dia (m)
(Km) (m) width (m)
1 75+400 1 0.2 13 7
2 76+915 1 0.6 13.5 12.2
3 77+980 1 0.6 12.7 11.5
4 80+440 8 0.6 7.5 6.8
5 81+650 1 0.6 7.5 13.2
6 56+900 LHS 6 0.9 7.5 7.5
56+900 RHS 2 1.2 18.4 7.5
7 56+950 LHS 3 1.2 10.9 7.5
56+950 RHS 1 2.4 10.9 7.5
8 56+980 LHS 2 1.2 7.5 7.5
56+980 RHS 6 0.6 18.4 7.5
9 57+180 1 0.6 7.9 7
10 57+390 1 0.6 12.4 7
11 57+690 1 0.6 12.4 7
12 58+089 1 0.6 9.8 7
13 59+615 1 0.6 11 7
14 63+893 1 1.2 10.5 7.2
15 65+264 1 0.3 - -
16 65+310 1 0.6 - -
17 65+573 1 0.6 9.1 8.4
18 65+880 1 0.6 9.4 7.3
19 66+788 1 0.6 12.8 7.3
20 67+264 1 0.6 13.2 7
21 67+427 1 0.6 10.1 7.1
22 67+604 1 0.6 11.1 7.1
23 67+852 1 1.2 12.7 7
24 68+357 1 0.6 12.7 7
25 68+970 1 0.6 12.2 7.1
26 69+751 1 0.9 12.3 7
27 69+820 1 0.6 12 7

(Km) (m) width (m)
28 70+740 1 0.6 12 7.3
29 71+700 2 0.6 12 7.3
30 72+100 1 0.3 8.9 7
31 72+900 2 0.9 - -
32 73+155 1 0.9 12.7 12.7
33 73+258 1 0.9 12.6 7.2
34 73+765 2 0.6 10.2 7
35 74+438 1 1.2 12.5 7.2
36 74+646 1 0.9 12 7.2
37 75+049 1 0.9 12 7.1
38 75+918 1 0.3 - -
39 76+148 1 1.2 12.1 7
40 76+298 1 0.6 12.3 7.1
41 76+670 1 0.6 - -
42 77+140 1 0.3 12 7.1
43 77+777 1 0.3 12.6 7
44 78+436 1 0.3 12.9 7.1
45 78+632 1 0.3 10.1 7.2
46 78+675 1 0.6 11.6 7.2
47 78+725 1 0.6 11.6 7.2
48 80+900 1 0.3 8.5 7
49 81+136 1 0.3 8,4 7
50 81+107 1 0.6 8.2 7
51 81+290 1 0.3 7.8 6
52 82+586 1 0.3 12.2 7
53 83+140 1 0.6 12.3 7
54 83+340 1 0.6 7.5 7
55 83+391 1 0.3 9.3 8.3
56 83+918 1 0.6 7.8 4
57 84+018 1 0.3 10.6 7.5
58 85+390 1 1.2 15.1 7
59 86+513 1 0.3 9.2 3.5
60 86+670 1 0.3 14.6 7
61 86+728 1 1.2 14.6 7
62 87+342 1 1.2 - -
63 87+900 1 0.6 - -
64 88+830 1 0.3 - -
65 89+038 1 0.6 8.3 7
66 89+749 1 0.6 7.8 6.8
67 90+270 2 0.9 8.1 7
68 91+209 1 0.9 - -
69 97+092 1 - 12 6.5
70 103+500 1 0.9 - -
71 102.668 1 0.9 - -
72 101.885 1 0.6 - -
73 101.545 1 0.6 - -

(Km) (m) width (m)
74 101.280 2 0.6 7.5 6.6
Pipe Culvert at Chainage 76+915
b. Slab Culverts
Table 2-11 shows the details of slab culverts found along the project road.
Table 2-11: Slab Culverts
Existing Total width Carriage way

Sl. No Nos. Span/Dia (m)
Chainage (Km) (m) width (m)
1 53+789 2 1.5 12.2 7
2 53+927 1 1.75 12.8 7
3 54+760 2 2.8 12.1 7
4 59+168 1 3 8.3 7
5 60+410 1 2 11 10
6 63+090 2 2x2 12.1 11.2
7 64+980 1 0.6 9.2 7.1
8 65+687 1 3 11.7 7.2
9 72+200 1 3 - -
10 73+602 1 1 12.1 7.2
11 75+583 1 1 12.2 7
12 88+891 2 1.5 7.3 -
13 89+568 2 1 8.1 7
14 90+764 2 2 7.3 7.3
15 92+217 2 2.75 6.5 7.5
16 92+857 1 2.2 7.9 7
17 98+253 1 1.3 10.6 9.5
18 99+014 1 3.5 16.2 15.2
19 99+214 1 3.5 10.6 9.6
20 99+735 1 2 10.6 9.5
21 100+130 2 1.6 10.6 9.6

Existing Total width Carriage way
Sl. No Nos. Span/Dia (m)
Chainage (Km) (m) width (m)
22 100+286 1 3.5 10.9 9.8
23 102+185 1 1.96 - -
24 101+801 1 2 - -
25 101+220 1 4 - -
26 56+100 2 1.2 10.4 6.8
27 56+650 1 1.2 10.7 6.8
28 57+150 1 1.2 12 7
29 57+400 1 3.1 12 7
Slab Culvert at Chainage 76+410 Slab Culvert at Chainage 132+300
Slab Culvert at Chainage 146+110 Slab Culvert at Chainage 146+970
Figure 2-3: Existing Slab culverts
c. Box Culverts
Existing Chainage Carriage way

Sl. No Nos. Span / Dia (m) Total width (m)
(Km) width (m)
1 102+850 1 3.550 7.500 6.600
2 102+798 1 2.600 7.500 6.600

d. Minor Bridges
All minor bridges are having of RCC solid slab type superstructure and open foundation with stone
masonry wall type substructure. Table 2-12 gives the details of minor bridges across the project road.
The detailed inventory data of cross drainage structures is given in Annexure-3.4 of Volume-IA.
Table 2-12: Minor Bridges
Sl. Existing No. of Total Carriageway

Span (m)
No. Chainage (Km) span width (m) width (m)
Beawar - Mandal
1 86+020 2x4.0+3x4.25+3x4.3+1x4.4 10.1 10.1
2 79+338 3 2.8 12.2 11.2
3 78+296 5 3 12.15 11
4 79+210 3 2.9 12.3 11.2
5 79+028 5 2.9 12.2 11
6 72+250 2 6 8.4 7
7 60+820 7 3.6 7.4 7.4
*The Minor Bridge at km 60+820 is under development by NHAI, under NH-148D connecting to Bhim –
Gulabpura.
MNB at Chainage 60+820
e. Major Bridges
One major bridge is observed in the project at km 35+900 over Mansi River. The bridge is of low level
type, without parapets. The bridge is also located on the curvilinear alignment of the project highway.
Table 2-13: List of Major Bridges
Existing Chainage No. of Span Total Carriageway width

Total width (m)
(km) span (m) Length (m) (m)
NIl

MJB at Chainage 35+925 MJB at Chainage 35+925
Figure 2-4: Condition of Major Bridge
f. RoBs
One ROB is found at km 11+500, over the broad gauge line traversing from Udaipur to Jaipur.
Table 2-14: List of ROB
Existing Total Length Total width Carriageway

Span Arrangement
Chainage (m) (m) width (m)
Nil

3 ENGINEERING SURVEYS & INVESTIGATION
3.1 GENERAL
The following detailed engineering survey is carried out to ascertain the existing project
features/details. The data collected from the field are investigated and analyzed to propose for the
improvement proposals.
 Topographic and physical features of the project and surrounding region including
environmental features.
 Road inventory
 Pavement condition.
 Traffic and turning movement surveys.
 Inventory of intersections, urban/congested areas
 Inventory and condition survey of bridges and other cross drainage structures.
 Axle load surveys
 BBD Surveys
 Material Investigations
3.2 TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY
The topographical survey has been carried out using Total Station. The following activities have been
performed during the survey:
 Traverse along the existing road and establishment of bench marks (BMS)
 Cross-sections at 50 m intervals and at critical locations.
 Longitudinal section levels along final centre line at 50 m in straight sections and at 10 m
interval in curved sections including fixation of cardinal points with a pair of reference pillars.
 Collection of details of all features such as structures (Bridges) utilities, existing road etc.
 For topographic surveys extended to a width of 30m beyond either side of the centre line of the
proposed divided carriageway or the land boundary whichever is more is surveyed. Where
existing road crosses the alignment, the survey extended to minimum 100m either side of the
road centre line and will be of sufficient width to allow improvements, including at grade
intersections to be designed.
 Longitudinal and cross-sections for major and minor streams over 150 meters on both sides of
ROW and 100 meters beyond the abutments.
 Location and type of services and utilities
 An open traverse could lead to cumulated errors of angles. Hence, every 10 km the traverse has
been closed to limit cumulative errors. The benchmarks have been referenced to GTS BMs of
the Survey of India. A separate team has carried out this task. The ground cross-sections and
details of features are referred to as the BMs. Separate teams concurrently with the traverse
team have carried out these tasks. The leveling of the longitudinal section along the final centre
line (FCL) and fixation of cardinal points has been carried out.
 The readings from the Total Stations has been registered using data base software and then
transferred to the survey model of the MX Road Software to prepare the DTM of the area
surveyed. The DTM and the longitudinal profile of the FCL have been computed by MX Road
software and drawn using Auto CAD on A3 size sheets showing 1 km sections (1:2500).
 For junctions/intersections, additional areas have been surveyed (ground sections,
topographical features and utilities) as required. During this Survey, all utilities within the areas
surveyed has been identified, and noted; complementary data has been collected from the
competent bodies to complete the picture.

 The final location survey has transferred the selected alignment to the ground by fixing
concrete pillars at intervals suitable on either side of the alignment. Temporary Benchmarks
have been established at intervals of 250 m as nail marks and permanent GPS Benchmarks have
been established at every 2 km.
 Close liaison has been maintained with the revenue officials of the state government of identify
the extent and ownership of land as also the formats for the land plans and schedules. Similar
action with the forest and environment officials has been taken for acquisition of forest land.
3.3 TRAFFIC SURVEYS
Various traffic surveys as per requirements of the TOR have been conducted on the Project Highway.
The detailed report of these surveys has been submitted under the report named, “First Traffic Survey
and Alignment Report”. The traffic count and other traffic surveys were carried out in the month of
November 2013. Proposed number and locations of traffic survey stations have been identified after
detail reconnaissance. Survey and count sheets have been spot checked on a regular basis and data
registered in the field office.
The detailed traffic analysis with given comment has incorporate in Chapter 4.
3.4 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
3.4.1 Classified Traffic Volume Counts
The classified volume count survey was conducted at three locations, each location representing mid
block count station for different homogeneous sections of project stretch. The count was conducted
continuously for 7 consecutive days and for 24 hours on all locations. The surveys were as per
guidelines illustrated in IRC: SP: 19 – 2001, ‘Manual for Survey, Investigation and Preparation of Road
Projects’.
3.4.2 Turning Movement Surveys
Data analysis of turning movements at four junctions reveals that generally peak hours are staggered.
The intersection volume count data is presented in Annexure 4.3 and analysis in Chapter 4.
3.4.3 Axle Load Survey
The vehicle loading spectrum in the project corridor and the corresponding damaging factor of different
categories of vehicles is an important parameter for the design of pavements. The main objective of the
axle load survey is to determine a Vehicle Damaging Factor (VDF) of each commercial vehicle & their
axle load band /distribution and expected damage on pavement and extent of over loading. The
methodology adopted for axle load survey is described below.
Axle load survey was conducted for duration of about 24 hour, in both directions along with the volume
count. Axle load survey has been carried out at 2 locations along the project road at km 147+000 near
Pratapgarh on SH-39 and 37+000 near to Brahmno ki Sareri. The survey has been conducted using
portable weigh pads.
Axle load survey was conducted to cover both direction traffic and both for empty and loaded
commercial vehicles. Commercial vehicles include Light Goods Vehicles, 2-axle trucks, and 3-axle trucks.
Approximately 10% of commercial vehicle samples were collected. The detail of axle load surveys along
with analysis is given in Annexure 8.1 and Annexure 8.2 of Volume-IA.

3.4.4 Pedestrian Count Survey
Pedestrian-Count Survey was carried out as per IRC 103-1988, ‘Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities’. The
analysis was undertaken separately for each of the intersection where traffic surveys were conducted.
The data and analysis of the survey is presented in Chapter 4.
3.4.5 Accident Black Spot Study
project road in order to identify the major accident locations and accident black spots. The analysis and
improvment are presented in Chapter 4.
3.4.6 Road Inventory Survey
Detailed road inventory surveys have been carried out to collect details of all existing road & pavement
features along the existing road sections. The data collected through road inventory surveys was
sufficient to meet the requirements. The data are presented in the format given as “Road Inventory
Data Sheet” (IRC-SP-19-2001). The headings are given below.
 Terrain (flat, rolling, mountainous)

 Land Use (agricultural, commercial, forest, residential etc) @ every kilometer;
 Name of Village
 Carriageway width, surfacing type and condition @ every 500m and every change of feature
whichever is earlier;
 Shoulder surfacing type and width and condition @ every 500m and every change of feature
whichever is earlier;
 Height of embankment or depth of cut @ every 200m and every change of feature whichever is
earlier.
 Submergence
 Details of cross road
The detail of road inventory surveys is provided in Annexure 2-1 of Volume-1A.
3.4.7 Pavement/Road Condition Survey
Pavement condition survey was done for collecting the basic information of the road structure & based
on this the road could be demarcated into
(i) Sections of more or less equal / uniform performance;
(ii) That is classified into similar characteristics or
(iii) Obtain homogeneous sections.
This operation consists primarily of visual operations supplemented by simple measurements for rut-
depth using a 3-meter straight edge. The criteria for classification of pavement sections have been
derived from IRC-81-1997 & maintenance manual., It is not practical to modify the overlay design at
frequent intervals; it will be preferable if the length of each section be kept at a minimum of 1 km
except in the case of localized failure or other situations requiring closer examination where minimum
length of section may be suitably fixed. In case the pavement shows severe distress or signs of
premature failure further investigation would be necessary to ascertain the causes & design remedial
measures.

A summary of existing pavement condition is given below, the identified poor stretches are proposed
for reconstruction. Table 3-1 indicates Summary of Pavement Condition (%). 77.6% (by length) of the
project road is good in good condition, 17.6 % length of project road is fair condition and 11.4 % length
of project road is in poor condition. Failed sections are in 5.8% of the length of project road, mostly
comprising the rigid pavements.
Table 3-1: Summary Pavement Condition
Condition % of Length
Good 77.6
Fair 17.6
Poor 11.4
Failed 5.8
Table 3-2: Pavement Condition of Existing Road, Package-2
Sl. No From (km) To (km) Length Condition

MDR-84 ( Sareri to Beawar)
1 53 59 6 Good
2 59 59.6 0.6 Failed Rigid Pavement
3 59.6 60 0.4 Poor
4 60 61 1 Fair
5 62.2 62.8 0.6 Rigid Pavement
6 62.8 63 0.2 Fair
7 63 64 1 Fair
8 64 65 1 Good
9 65 66 1 Good
10 66 67 1 Good
11 67 68 1 Good
12 68 69 1 Good
13 69 70 1 Good
14 70 71 1 Good
15 71 71.6 0.6 Good
16 71.6 73 1.4 Rigid Pavement Failed
17 73 77 4 Good
18 77 78 1 Good
19 78 78.2 0.2 Rigid Pavement Failed
20 78.2 81.4 3.2 Fair
21 81.4 81.8 0.4 Rigid Pavement Failed
22 81.8 99.8 18 Good
23 99.8 100 0.2 Fair
The detail of pavement condition survey is presented as Annexure3-1 of Volume-IA

Carriageway at km 82+000 Carriageway at 58+3000
Figure 3-1: Pavement Condition
3.5 BENKELMAN BEAM DEFLECTION SURVEY
Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique is useful in evaluating the strengthening requirements of the
existing flexible road pavements. The basic principle of deflection method considers the performance of
flexible pavements which is closely related to the elastic deflection / deformation of pavement under
the wheel loads.
The amount of pavement deflection under an applied design wheel load or its rebound deflection on
removal of this load is a measure of the structural stability of the pavement system. Larger rebound
deflection indicates weaker pavement structure indicative of strengthening and/or higher overlay
thickness for the pavement.
Structural strength surveys for existing two lane pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection
Technique were carried out in accordance with the procedure given in IRC: 81-1997 “Guidelines for
Strengthening of Flexible Road Pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique”. The summary
of Characteristic deflection observed along the project road is shown below Table 3-3:
Table 3-3: Summary of Characteristic Deflection, Package-2
Chainage (KM)
Sl. No. Length Characteristic Deflection (mm)
From To
1 53.000 54.000 1.000 1.254
2 59.500 60.500 1.000 1.237
3 64.000 65.000 1.000 1.364
4 69.750 70.750 1.000 1.627
5 76.000 77.000 1.000 1.867
6 85.500 86.500 1.000 1.844
7 87.500 88.500 1.000 1.304
8 90.000 91.000 1.000 0.668
9 95.000 96.000 1.000 0.829
10 99.750 100.750 1.000 1.186
11 100.750 101.750 1.000 1.143

The Benkelman beam deflection analysis is given in Annexure 3.2 of Volume-IA.
3.6 PAVEMENT COMPOSITION/SOIL INVESTIGATIONS
In order to ascertain pavement composition trial pits (1mx1m in plan) were dug at every 5000m interval
(staggered left & right) or at each major change in the pavement condition, whichever is less. For each
test pit the following information has been recorded:
 Test pit reference (Identification number, location)

 Pavement composition (material type & thickness)
 Subgrade type (textural classification) and condition
The thickness of bituminous courses varies from 60 to 100 mm, whereas thickness of non-bituminous
courses varies from 150 to 450 mm
The details of the investigations are presented below:
Field Moisture at Ch. 76+000 Trial Pit at Ch. 43+000
Figure 3-2 :Test Pits

Table 3-4: Test Results of Trial Pits, Package-2
Sl. Ex. Design Road Side Wearing Base Sub-Base Subgrade Total Moisture
No Chainage Chainage Section Type Thickness Type Thickness Type Thickness Type Thickness Thickness Content
(Km) (Km) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) %
1 60/000 60/000 MDR-84 LHS BT 60 WBM Boulder 180 Gravelly Soil 100 340 4.5
2 64/000 64/000 MDR-84 RHS BT 70 WMM 100 - Gravelly Soil 200 370 5
3 69/900 69/900 MDR-84 LHS BT 80 WMM 200 - - - 280 3.5
4 75/000 75/000 MDR-84 LHS BT 70 WMM 150 GSB 110 - - 330 -
5 76/000 76/000 MDR-84 RHS BT 80 WBM 200 - - - 280 6
6 77/000 77/000 MDR-84 RHS BT 70 WMM 150 - - - 220 4
7 86/000 86/000 MDR-84 LHS BT 70 WMM 200 - - - 270 4
8 88/000 88/000 MDR-84 RHS BT 80 WMM 200 - Gravelly Soil 150 430 3.5
9 90/000 90/000 MDR-84 LHS BT 80 WBM 200 - Gravelly Soil 100 380 3.5
10 96/000 96/000 MDR-84 RHS BT 80 WBM 210 - Gravelly Soil 100 390 3
11 99/000 99/000 MDR-84 RHS BT 130 WMM 110 GSB 110 - - 350 -
3.7 SUB GRADE CHARACTERISTICS & STRENGTH
The testing of soils for classification & mechanical characteristics has been as per terms of reference. “Testing of three sub-grade soil samples for each
design section or three samples for each soil type encountered, whichever is more has been done”.
Thus testing for sub-grade soil at each test pit includes:

 In-situ density & moisture content
 Field CBR using DCP
 Characterization (Grain size & Atterberg’s Limits)
 Laboratory moisture-density characteristics (modified AASHTO compactions)
 Laboratory CBR (uncooked & 4 day soaked compacted at 3 energy levels)

Table 3-5: Laboratory Test Results of Sub grade Soil Samples, Package - 2
CBR Value
Mechanical Properties Atterberg's Limits Maximum Optimum
(%)
Sr. IS Dry Moisture
Location Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) Liquid Plastic
No. Plasticity Classification Density Content
Up to 4.75 4.75–0.075 0.075- Less Than Limit Limit Soaked
Index (%) (G/Cc) (%)
mm mm 0.002 mm 0.002 mm (%) (%)
1 53/000 NH-158 12 63 --25-- - NP - SM 1.99 7.74 7.2
2 60/000 NH-158 12 60 --28-- - NP - SM 1.97 7.55 7.5
3 64/000 NH-158 6 54 --40-- - NP - SM 1.92 8.2 8.2
4 69/900 NH-158 5 60 --35-- - NP - SM 1.89 9.1 6.1
5 77/000 NH-158 7 55 --32-- - NP - SM 1.86 9.2 6
6 86/000 NH-158 8 60 --36-- - NP - SM 1.89 8.9 6.3
7 88/000 NH-158 6 58 --30-- - NP - SM 1.85 9.6 6
8 90/000 NH-158 10 60 --35-- - NP - SM 1.92 8.4 6.7
9 96/000 NH-158 12 62 --26-- - NP - SM 1.93 8.1 7.7
10 99/000 NH-158 10 68 --22-- - NP - SM 1.93 7.45 7.6
*From the trial-pit investigation (subgrade test results presented in Table 3.4, it is observed that the majority of existing subgrade soils are acceptable as
they fulfill the physical requirements of MORTH specifications clause 305.2.1.

Table 3-6: Laboratory Test Results of Bypass Soil Samples, Package - 2
CBR
Mechanical Properties Atterberg'S Limits
Maximu Optimum Value (%)
IS
Sr. m Dry Moisture
Location Gravel Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) Liquid Plastic Plasticit Classificati
No. Density Content
(%) Up to 4.75– 0.075- Less Than Limit Limit y Index on Soaked
(G/Cc) (%)
4.75 mm 0.075 mm 0.002 mm 0.002 mm (%) (%) (%)
1 Kaniya Khera Kotra Realignment 6 34 --60-- 34 20 14 CL 1.84 11.80 5.6
2 Badnor Realignment 0 68 --32-- - NP - SM 1.92 8.25 5.9
3 Asind Realignment 0 60 --40-- - NP - SM 1.90 7.50 6.1
4 Pipal Bariya Realignment 5 37 --58-- 34 19 15 CL 1.84 10.90 5.4
5 Hiradhani Realignment 6 45 --49-- 31 20 11 SC 1.86 8.60 6.5
6 Ojiyana Realignment 0 62 --35-- - NP - SM 1.84 7.50 6.3

3.8 INVESTIGATION FOR BORROW MATERIALS
The borrow areas were first identified by visual inspection and enquiries along the project road and
adjacent areas are listed Table 3-7, however the soil samples are collected from 9 numbers of these
borrow areas, and the required tests as per specification & IRC/BIS codes were done. Grain size analysis
was done for particles smaller than 4.75mm.
The following test has been conducted to check the suitability of the fine-grained materials:
 Grain size analysis

 Atterberg limits
 Maximum laboratory dry unit weight (Heavy Compaction)
 Optimum moisture content
 CBR (4 days soaked)
Material found satisfactory can be used for construction activity.
Table 3-7: List of Borrow Areas along the Project Road (Package – 2)
Lead Distance Road

Sl. no. Chainage (Km) Direction Type of Land Approx. Area
From Project Road Section
1 102/700 RHS 100m Barren 200*200m MDR-84
2 102/400 LHS 100m Hillock 100*150m MDR-84
3 101/200 RHS 100m Barren 100*100m MDR-84
4 100/200 Both 150m Pond 100*100m MDR-84
5 99/500 RHS 100m Barren 100*100m MDR-84
6 97/400 RHS 100m Hillock 100*100m MDR-84
8 87/000 RHS 400M Hillock 100*100m MDR-84
12 80/000 Both 100m Barren 200*100m MDR-84
13 78/700 LHS 100m Barren 150*150m MDR-84
14 77/600 LHS 200m Barren 100*100m MDR-84
16 77/000 RHS 100m Barren 100*100m MDR-84
22 66/600 Both 100m Hillock 100*100m MDR-84
23 65/000 Both 100m Hillock 100*150m MDR-84
24 63/000 RHS 300m Pond 200*100m MDR-84

Table 3-8: Laboratory Test Results of Borrow Soil Samples (Package – 2)
Value (%)
Optimum Moisture Content (%)
Maximum Dry Density (G/cc)
CBR
Mechanical Properties Atterberg's Limits
Location Chainage Km
IS Classification
Road Section
Gravel (%) Up to 4.75
Sand (%) 4.75–0.075
Silt (%) 0.075-0.002

Sr. No.
Plasticity Index (%)

Clay (%) Less Than
Plastic Limit (%)

Liquid Limit (%)
0.002 mm
Soaked
mm
mm
mm
1 68/500 MDR-84 0.00 69.60 30.40 21 NP NP SM 2.079 6.80 11.30
2 70/200 MDR-84 42.00 48.00 10.00 - NP NP SM 2.05 8.20 9.10
3 80/600 MDR-84 3.00 68.00 29.00 - NP NP SM 1.98 8.00 8.50
4 87/000 MDR-84 0.00 63.50 36.50 25 NP NP SM 1.98 7.20 10.00
*The test results indicate that the soils in the potential borrow areas fall in SM classes. Their CBR values
ranges from 7.8 to 11.3. Pavement design shall be based on 90th percentile CBR value.
Sand Source at Banas River Aggregate Source at Samoudi Village
Figure 3-3: Borrow Area Locations
3.9 INVESTIGATIONS FOR MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION
The investigation of different quarries was conducted from different places where stone aggregates and
sand are available. Samples were collected and tests were performed in accordance with IS: 2386 (Part
III), IS: 120 (Part I), AASHTO-T182, IS: 624-1971, IS: 2380 (Part V).

Table 3-9: Identified Aggregate Sources
Lead
Distance Rate per
Sr. Village Name of Size of Contact
Chainage Location From Cft.(year Remarks
no. Name Crusher Aggregate Details
Project 2014)
Road
10000 m 40mm 15
from 20mm 20
On Sulaxi/Sulbhi Total 25
Mandal 10mm 15
1 Samaudi Bhilwara Stone 9414114177 Nos
Junction 6mm 12
Bypass Crusher Crusher
Start
Point Dust 2
Ishwar Lal-
40mm 12
9414771111
Ramnath-
20mm 17
On Savariya 9571371662 Total 5
93+000
2 Borva Project 7km Stone 10mm 15 & Nos
RHS
Road Crusher Mr. Jagdish ji Crusher
lamba
6mm 9
(head)-
9829301027
Gopal ji-
40mm 12
9950521499
On 20mm 17 & Total
93+000 Mahalaxmi
3 Borva Project 7 Mohd. Arif- 2Nos
RHS crusher Plant 10mm 15
Road 7357860888 Crusher
6mm 9
Dust 6
Table 3-10: Sieve analysis for Coarse Aggregates (40 mm)
Gradation: - As Per IS 383

Sieve size (mm) Wt. Retained Cum. Wt. Retained Cum Wt. Permissible limits for %
(g) (g) (%) Passing (%) passing
63 0 0 0 100 100
40 142 142 2.84 97.16 85-100
20 4250 4392 87.84 12.16 0-15
10 608 5000 100 0 0-5
Table 3-11: Physical requirement for Coarse Aggregates (40 mm)
Sr. No. Particular’s Results Limits As Per IS: 2386

1 Specific Gravity 2.85 G/cc --
2 Water Absorption 0.42% Max.2%
3 Aggregate Impact Value 9.10% Max 30 %
4 Flakiness & Elongation Index 26.20% Max Combine 30%

Table 3-12: Sieve analysis for Coarse Aggregates (20 mm)
Gradation: - As Per IS 383

Sieve size Cum. Wt.
Cum Wt. Passing Permissible limits for %
Wt. Retained (g) Retained
(mm) (%) passing
(g) (%)
40 0 0 0 100 100
20 453 453 9.06 90.94 85-100
10 4420 4873 97.46 2.54 0-15
4.75 100 4973 99.46 0.54 0-5
Pan 27 5000 100 0 0
Table 3-13: Physical requirement for CoarseAggregates (20 mm)
Sr. No. Particular’s Results Limits As Per IS: 2386

1 Specific Gravity 2.84 G/cc --
2 Water Absorption 0.48% Max.2%
3 Aggregate Impact Value 9.47% Max 30 %
4 Flakiness & Elongation Index 24.85% Max Combine 30%
Test Results on Fine Aggregate
Sand is abundantly available in Jalamand, river, which is 7 km away from the project road at km
139+000. The Sand is also available from Banas River on Chittorgarh Road 20 km away from Mandal,
and Mansi River at Km. 35 + 700. The test results of the aggregate are given in Table 3-14, 3-15.
Table 3-14: Sieve analysis for Fine Aggregates
Cum Wt.
Sieve size Wt. Retained Cum. Wt. Retained Requirement as per IS
Passing
383 for zone II
(mm) (g) (g) (%) (%)
4.75 66 66 6.6 93.4 90-100
2.36 83 149 14.9 85.1 75-100
1.18 181 330 33 67 55-90
0.6 235 565 56.5 43.5 35-59
0.3 287 852 85.2 14.8 8-30
0.15 127 979 97.9 2.1 0-10
0.075 19 998 99.8 0.2 0
PAN 2 1000 100 0 0
Table 3-15: Physical requirementfor Fine Aggregates
Sl. no. Particular’s Results as per IS:2386

1 Finess Modulus 2.94
2 Zone II
3 Specific gravity 2.66 g/cc

3.9.1 Fly Ash – Alternate Material for Embankment
Fly Ash is a lightweight material, which may be used for construction of embankment, sub-grades etc.
singly or by mixing with suitable admixtures. The flyash is laid in alternate layers with soil and earth
blankets are also provided on the side slopes for the confinement of the materials as per IRC: SP: 58 –
Guidelines for use of Flyash in Road Embankment. The guidelines regarding design / construction of
embankments are given in IRC SP: 58-2001.
The thermal power plant at Kota Super Thermal Power Station (KSTPS) is nearest to our project highway
& is at a distance of 168+00 kms from project Highway. Flyash can provide technically viable,
environmentally sound & cost effective alternative to natural borrow soil. The following properties of
flyash have been tested;
 Gradation
 Specific Gravity
 Modified Proctor MDD & OMC
 Coefficient of Consolidation
 Permeability
Sample collected from Kota Super Thermal Power Station (KSTPS) indicate that the material is a typical
fine-grained, non-plastic and predominantly cohesion less soils. Modified Proctor Test gives a low MDD
value of 1.24 gm/cc and OMC of 25%.
To prevent the surrounding air from pollution it is needless to mention that proper care should be taken
to transport, stack, lay and compact the fly ash materials in wet conditions, until the fly ash
embankment with clay blanket on both the side slopes reaches its required height and is covered by a
500mm capping layer of sub-grade soil at the top of the embankment.
The test results for the fly ash sample collected from Kota Super Thermal Power Station (KSTPS)
issummarized in Table 3-16 below:
Table 3-16: Test Results of Flyash of Kota Super Thermal Power Station (KSTPS)
Proctor Consoli-
Gradation Test
Density dation
Identification Number
Distance from ROB
Gravel Size Particles (%)
% of Passing
Specific Gravity
Sand Size Particles (%)
Permeability
Consolidation Cv
Coefficient of
MDD (gm/cc)
Clay Size (%)
Silt Size (%)
OMC (%)
0.600 mm
0.425 mm
0.300 mm
0.150 mm
0.075 mm
4.75 mm
2.00 mm
1.18 mm
EO
10 mm
CC
127+00 (RHS)
6.10×10-7
3.30×10-7
0.0137
FA-01
96.95
93.76
86.71
2.19
1.24
100
100
100
100
100
100
0.7
87
25
0
9

3.9.2 Quarry Chart
The quarry chart showing the available construction materials along the project road is given in
Annexure 3.3 of Volumn-IA.
3.10 INVESTIGATIONS OF OTHER CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
Availability and suitability of other construction materials like fly ash, coarse sand, local sand and bricks
were investigated. Cement, Steel and Bitumen are manufactured items and readily available.
3.11 INVESTIGATIONS FOR STRUCTURE
Inventory of all the structures along the project road was performed. The inventory included the
parameters required as per the guidelines of IRC-SP: 35-1990. The inventory of culverts is presented in a
tabular form covering relevant physical and hydraulic parameters. Detailed inventory and condition is
presented in Annexure 3.4 Volume-1A of this report.
3.12 HYDRAULIC & HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS
IRC Special Publication No. 13-2004 (“Guidelines for the Design of Small Bridges and Culverts”) and IRC:
5-2015 (“Standard Specifications & Code of Practice for Road Bridges, Section I General Feature of
Design”). These investigations were carried out for all existing drainage structures along the road
sections under the study.
Study on topography (topographic maps), storm duration, rainfall statistics, topsoil characteristics,
vegetation cover etc were done so as to assess the catchments areas and hydraulic parameters for all
existing and proposed drainage provisions. The findings of the desk study have been further
supplemented and augmented by a reconnaissance along the area. All-important hydrological features
were noted during this field reconnaissance.
Information on high flood level (HFL), low water levels (LWL), discharge velocity etc. were collected
from available past records, local inquiries and visible signs, on the structural components and
embankments. Local inquiries were also made with regard to the road sections getting overtopped
during heavy rains.

4 TRAFFIC SURVEYS AND ANALYSIS
4.1 GENERAL
The traffic studies have been carried out to study the behavioral pattern of the traffic along the project
road, the likely diverging and merging points and to assess the nature of flow. The traffic surveys also
carried out over the connecting link of NH-8, and incorporated in this Chapter-4. However the same is
excluded from further chapters.
4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF HOMOGENEOUS SECTIONS
Based on the traffic flow characteristics, project road has been divided into 5 homogenous sections and
the details are given below.
Table 4-1: Homogeneous Traffic Sections
Homogeneous Length Name of the

From To Remarks
Traffic Section (km) road section
at km 149.000,
HS-I (RAS- km 149.00/ km there is another
km 129.25 19.750 SH-39
BEAWAR) 74.000 km stone
showing 73.000
km 58.000 (of
HS-II (BEAWAR – km 63.400 (of NH-
ODR-35)/ km 5.8 NH-8
LAMBA) 8)
57.600 (of NH-8)
km 63.400 (of
HS-III (LAMBA- NH-8)/km km 71.000 (of
32.5 MDR-84
BADNOR) 103.500 (of MDR-84)
MDR-84)
HS-IV (BADNOR -
km 71.000 (of km 30.000 (of
HARIPURA 41
MDR-84) MDR-84 and SH-61)
CHOWRAHA )
HS-V (HARIPURA km 30.000 (of SH-61
CHOWRAHA - MDR-84 and SH- km 12.000 (SH-61) 18 connect to
MANDAL) 61) NH-79
The following sections of state highways and National highways have been combined and declared to
be NH-158 as per the notification dated January31, 2013, published by the Gazette of India.
Note: In the above table the chainages mentioned are of the existing respective highways where the
surveys have been carried out.
4.3 TRAFFIC SURVEYS
 To assess the volumes of traffic flows along the project road and their characteristics.
 To access the requirement of number of lanes in the future years.
 To assess the loading pattern of commercial vehicles with Axle load survey, this shall be
presented in the Feasibility Report.
The traffic survey locations were selected based on reconnaissance of the project road, requirements of
the study to determine local and long distance traffic flows and major / minor diversions if any.

The field surveys are carried out at the following locations:
Table 4-2: Traffic Volume Count Survey Locations
Traffic Survey Locations - Package-2

Sl. No. Type of Survey Duration Location Date(s) of Survey
1 Classified Volume 7 Days, 24 hours km 82.000 of MDR-84 14/11/2013 to
2 Count Survey km 62.000 of MDR-84 20/11/2013
3 Classified Volume 3 Days 24 Hours km 82.000 of MDR-84 21/11/2018 to
4 Count Survey: km 62.000 of MDR-84 23/11/2018
Second Survey
5 TMC Survey 24 Hours km 103.570 of MDR-84 02-11-2018
6 Pedestrian/ Cattle 12 Hours km 72.000 of MDR-84 22-11-2018
7 crossing km 55.000 of MDR-84 22-11-2018
The survey locations are depicted in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4-1: Traffic Surveys Location Map
4.4 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
4.4.1 Classified Volume Count Survey
This survey will be carried out manually for 7 days 24 hrs. The data collected shall be computerized in
MS-EXCEL software and analyzed to depict hourly and daily variation.The vehicle classification has been
developed based on the guidelines by IRC, project requirements and approved by the client. Toll

exempted vehicles have been counted separately so that the same are excluded in the estimation of toll
revenue. The counting has been done manually through trained enumerators and the data has been
collected in 15 minute intervals.
4.4.2 Traffic Analysis
The data (primary and secondary) collected has been analyzed to obtain information on ADT, Seasonal
variation, AADT, traffic composition and Peak Hour traffic. This information along with the appreciation
of other relevant parameters formed part of the basic input for the estimation of traffic growth. These
are discussed in the following paragraphs.
4.4.3 Traffic Characteristics
The analysis of the directional classified traffic volume counts observed at various count stations has
been carried out to work out the following traffic characteristics:
 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) including toll exempted vehicles
 Hourly Variation
 Daily Variation in Traffic Volume
 Directional Distribution
 Composition of ADT
 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)
The various vehicle types having different sizes and characteristics were converted into Equivalent
Passenger Car Units. The Passenger Car Unit (PCU) factors recommended by Indian Road Congress in
“Guidelines for Capacity of Roads in Rural Areas” (IRC-64-1990) have been used for conversion, and are
presented in Table 4.3.
Table 4-3: Vehicle Classification and PCU Factors Used In the Study
Vehicle Type PCU Factor

Fast Moving Vehicles
Car, jeep and van (New and Old technology) 1
Taxi 1
Shared jeep 1
Three wheeler 1
Two wheeler 0.5
Mini bus 1.5
Bus (Private & Government classified) 3
Light goods vehicle (Passenger & Goods carrying) 1.5
Truck 2-axle 3
Truck 3-axle 3
4-6 Axle Truck 4.5
> =7 Axle Truck 4.5
Agricultural tractor 1.5
Agricultural tractor with trailer 4.5
Cycle 0.5
Cycle rickshaw 2
Animal/Hand drawn cart 6

4.5 DATA ANALYSIS- CLASSIFIED TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNT-First Traffic Survey
4.5.1 Average Daily Traffic
The following Table 4-4 gives the summary of Average Daily Traffic (ADT) at 6 survey locations based on
average of 7 days traffic volume count surveys.
Table 4-4: Average Daily Traffic Volume (ADT)
Vehicle Type km 82 of MDR-84 km 62 of MDR-84

Car/ Jeep/Van 333 744
Taxi 21 19
Shared Jeep 34 41
Two wheeler 1154 3518
3wh 29 82
Minibus 1 6
School Bus 1 11
Bus (Govt) 5 7
Bus (Pvt) 69 110
Goods Pick-Up 165 272
LCV (4 Tyre) 40 45
LCV (6 Tyre) 49 70
2-Axle 136 113
3-Axle 151 158
4 to 6 axle 125 119
7 axle and above 0 0
Tractor 18 41
Tractor with Trailer 42 56
Cycle 16 215
Cycle Rickshaw 0 0
Animal cart 0 4
Others 2 7
Car/ Jeep 1 11
Bus 1 1
Truck 0 0
Total (Vehicles) 2393 5650
Total (PCU's) 3180 5322

Figure 4-2: Traffic Volume at Various Traffic Count Locations
The vehicle category wise ADT is attached in Annexure 4.1 of Volume-1A.
4.5.2 Daily Variation of Traffic
From the graphs presented in the figures below, it is observed that the traffic movement is more or less
uniform throughout the week at all the 6 locations.
Daily Variation of Traffic at Km 82 of MDR-84

4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
Traffic
1500
1000
500
Day
Total Vehicles Total PCU
Figure 4-3: Daily Variation of traffic flows at km 82 of MDR-84

Daily Variation of Traffic at Km 62 of MDR-84

7000
6000
5000
4000
Traffic
3000
2000
1000
Day
Total Vehicles Total PCU
Figure 4-4: Daily Variation of traffic flows at km 62 of MDR-84
Hourly Distribution and Directional Distribution of Traffic
The hourly variations of average daily traffic volume (ADT) are presented in Figure 4-5 to 4-11.
Hourly Variation of Traffic at Km 82 of MDR-84

200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Passenger Vehicles Freight Vehicles Total Fast Moving Vehicles Total Slow Moving Vehicles
Figure 4-5: Hourly Variation of Traffic Flows at km 82 of MDR-84

Hourly Variation of Traffic at Km 62 of MDR-84

500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Passenger Vehicles Freight Vehicles Total Fast Moving Vehicles Total Slow Moving Vehicles
Figure 4-6: Hourly Variation of Traffic Flows at km 62 of MDR-84
 The graphs for the hourly variation represents that there is no prominent peak hour,
although it is observed that the passenger traffic during the day is more than that at night.
 The movement of commercial vehicles is seen to be higher during the night.
Directional distribution of total traffic and commercial vehiclesare also analysed. The analysis reveals
that the directional distribution is almost same on both directions.
Table 4-5: Directional Distribution of Traffic (DDT)
Survey Location Direction DDT-Total Traffic (% ADT)

Beawar to Asind 51%
km 82 of MDR-84
Asind to Beawar 49%
Beawar to Asind 54%
km 62 of MDR-84
Asind to Beawar 46%
4.5.3 Traffic Composition
Traffic composition at surveyed locations is summarized below:

Composition of Total Traffic at Km 82 of MDR-84

1%
Tractors Cars
3% 15%
Trucks
Taxi
28%
1%
Buses
3%
Three Wheelers/ Magic

1%
Two wheelers
48%
Figure 4-7: Composition of Traffic Volumes at km 82 of MDR-84
Composition of Total Traffic at Km 62 of MDR-84

4%
Trucks
14% Tractors Cars
2% 14%
Taxi
0%
Buses
2%
Three Wheelers/ Magic
2%
Two wheelers
62%
Figure 4-8: Composition of Traffic Volumes at km 62 of MDR-84
 It is observed that the percentage of fast moving vehicles is almost 100% with negligible
slow moving traffic.

 The percentage of commercial vehicles varies between 18 % and 28% at all the 6 locations.
 The percentage of cars at all the 6 locations varies between from 14% to 23%.
4.5.4 Annual Average Daily Traffic
The traffic plying on any road generally varies over the different periods of the year depending on the
cycle of different socio-economic activities in the regions through which it passes. Therefore, in order to
have more realistic picture of the traffic on the project road, it is required to assess seasonal variation in
traffic to estimate Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT). Therefore, the ADT observed during the survey
duration is multiplied by a Seasonal Correction Factor (SCF) to derive AADT.
The seasonal correction factor is generally derived from secondary data sources such as past month-
wise traffic data on the project road, monthly toll revenues from existing tolled highways in the
immediate influence area, sales of fuel at different filling stations along the project highway.
The details of monthly fuel sales were collected from 4 petrol pumps along the project road. The
average sales of the petrol pump have been used in working out the SCF.
Table 4-6: Fuel Sales
Month Petrol Sales (Kilo Litres) Diesel Sales (Kilo Litres)

Apr 47710 133415
May 55812 143623
Jun 54518 168824
Jul 53080 147710
Aug 57526 108008
Sep 52707 108667
Oct 53216 129174
Nov 51693 156635
Dec 42912 145727
Jan 46198 127094
Feb 43029 131914
Mar 56326 140844
Theseasonalfactorisdeterminedbytakingtheaveragesales dividedbythemonthlysales.
Table 4-7: Seasonal Correction Factor
Petrol (SCF) Diesel (SCF)

Apr 1.07 1.03
May 0.92 0.95
Jun 0.94 0.81
Jul 0.97 0.93
Aug 0.89 1.27
Sep 0.97 1.26
Oct 0.96 1.06
Nov 0.99 0.87
Dec 1.19 0.94
Jan 1.11 1.08

Petrol (SCF) Diesel (SCF)

Feb 1.19 1.04
Mar 0.91 0.97
For the present study, a SCF of 0.99(petrol) and 0.87(diesel) is taken as the survey was done in the
month of November. Hence, for this present preliminary study The AADT is as given in the Table 4-8
below:
Table 4-8: Summary of Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)

Car/ Jeep/Van 310 692
Taxi 18 17
Shared Jeep 30 36
Two wheeler 1154 3518
3wh 29 82
Minibus 1 5
School Bus 1 10
Bus (Govt) 4 6
Bus (Pvt) 60 96
Goods Pick-Up 144 237
LCV (4 Tyre) 35 39
LCV (6 Tyre) 43 61
2-Axle 118 98
3-Axle 131 137
4 to 6 axle 109 104
7 axle and above 0 0
Tractor 18 41
Tractor with Trailer 42 56
Cycle 16 215
Cycle Rickshaw 0 0
Animal cart 0 4
Others 2 6
Car/ Jeep 1 11
Bus 1 1
Truck 0 0
Total (Vehicles) 2267 5472
Total (PCU's) 2896 4976

4.6 DATA ANALYSIS- CLASSIFIED TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNT: Second Traffic Survey
4.6.1 Average Daily Traffic
Three days traffic counts were carried out in Month of November 2018 at five locations and data of the
same is presented below in Table 4.9.
Table 4-9: Summary of Average Daily Traffic (ADT) _Second Survey

Car / Jeep / Van (Private) 280 564
Car / Jeep (Taxi) 0 0
Shared Jeep 123 12
Mini Bus 1 1
School Bus 1 6
Std. Bus 77 77
Maxx/Pick-Up 197 178
LCV (4 tyre) 15 14
LCV (6 tyre) 34 40
2 Axle 99 64
3 Axle 129 91
MAV (4 to 6 Axles) 299 247
MAV (> 6 Axles) 0 0
Others 0 0
Total vehicles 1255 1294
Total PCUs 2939 2662
Non – Tollable Traffic (nos)
3 Wheeler 50 65
2 Wheeler 2029 3128
Agriculture Tractor 8 16
Agriculture Tractor with Trailer 97 108
Cycle 4 26
Cycle Rickshaw 0 0
Animal Drawn Cart 0 0
Toll Exempted Car 0 3
Toll Exempted Bus 0 0
Toll Exempted Truck 0 0
Total Non-Tollable (Nos.) 2188 3346
Total Non-Tollable (PCUs) 1515 2155
Grand Total (Nos.) 3443 4640
Grand Total (PCUs) 4454 4817
4.6.2 Annual Average Daily Traffic
AADT is the base year (2018-19) traffic. This is a product of ADT and seasonal variation factor. Seasonal
variation factor can be derived using various methods. Vehicle data from toll booths check posts etc. or
sale details of petrol and diesel fuels along the corridor are the commonly used sets of data. In the

present case fuel sale data is used, which is collected from various fuel outlets along the project stretch.
Sales of petrol and diesel in each month for the last two years are used to arrive at seasonal correction
factors. Table 4-10 shows the seasonal factors calculated.
Table 4-10: Seasonal Correction Factor
Month Petrol (SCF) Diesel (SCF)

Apr 0.96 0.92
May 0.88 0.92
Jun 0.99 0.88
Jul 0.96 1.11
Aug 0.92 1.11
Sep 0.95 1.05
Oct 0.99 0.98
Nov 1.01 0.95
Dec 1.17 1.01
Jan 1.19 1.04
Feb 1.16 1.06
Mar 0.95 1.03
For the present study, a SCF of 1.01 (petrol) and 0.95 (diesel) is taken as the survey was done in the
month of November. Hence, for this present preliminary study, the AADT is as given in the Table 4-11
below:
Table 4-11: Summary of Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) _Second Survey

Car / Jeep / Van (Private) 274 553
Car / Jeep (Taxi) 0 0
Shared Jeep 117 11
Mini Bus 1 1
School Bus 1 6
Std. Bus 77 77
Maxx/Pick-Up 187 169
LCV (4 tyre) 14 13
LCV (6 tyre) 32 38
2 Axle 94 61
3 Axle 123 86
MAV (4 to 6 Axles) 284 235
MAV (> 6 Axles) 0 0
Others 0 0
Total vehicles 1204 1250
Total PCUs 2812 2559
Non – Tollable Traffic (nos)
3 Wheeler 50 65
2 Wheeler 2029 3128
Agriculture Tractor 8 16


Agriculture Tractor with Trailer 97 108
Cycle 4 26
Cycle Rickshaw 0 0
Animal Drawn Cart 0 0
Toll Exempted Car 0 3
Toll Exempted Bus 0 0
Toll Exempted Truck 0 0
Total Non-Tollable (Nos.) 2188 3346
Total Non-Tollable (PCUs) 1515 2155
Grand Total (Nos.) 3392 4596
Grand Total (PCUs) 4327 4714
This AADT count has been used further for analysis.
4.7 DATA ANALYSIS- ORIGIN DESTINATION SURVEY
4.7.1 Introduction
Origin - destination (O-D) surveys were conducted to elicit information related to the base year travel
characteristics of goods and passenger trips using the project road and likely future traffic diversions to
or from the project road. The travel characteristics obtained by O-D survey would facilitate the
identification of (i) local and through traffic on the project road, and (ii) the tollable traffic at the toll
plazas. The surveys were performed at 2 locations.
The surveys were carried out using the road side interview (RSI) technique for one day (24 hours) at two
locations. Road users were interviewed by trained enumerators to obtain the required data under the
guidance of traffic engineers and supervisors. For this purpose, cars (private and taxi cars) and buses
were considered as passenger vehicles. Similarly, LMVs, LCVs, 2-axle trucks, 3- axle trucks, 4 to 6-axle
trucks and > 6-axle trucks were considered as goods vehicles.
The information collected contained trip origin and trip destination. In addition, type of commodity for
goods vehicles and purpose and occupancy for passenger vehicles were also collected. Further, trip
length and frequency also elicited during OD surveys. The sample size of the surveys is provided in
Table 4-12 below.
Table 4-12: Sample Size of OD survey
Km 42.000_MDR-84
Mode
Sample AADT % Sample
Car/Jeep/Van 322 628 51.3
Taxi 0 0 -
Shared Jeep 118 189 62.4
Mini Bus 0 0 -
School Bus 0 0 -
Std. Bus 57 108 52.8
Mini LCV, Tata ACE 116 204 56.9
LCV (4 Wheelers) 14 22 63.6
LCV (6 Wheelers) 33 46 71.7

Km 42.000_MDR-84
Mode
Sample AADT % Sample
Two Axle Trucks 31 112 27.7
Three Axle Trucks 64 104 61.5
Multi-Axle Vehicle (4 to 6 Axle) 230 272 84.6
The data collected from RSI were entered into the computer and checked manually. Incorrect entries
were corrected by cross-checking it with original field data sheets. The data was also checked for
inconsistencies. The checking included:
 Trips from zones to zones which cannot possibly travel through the survey location
 Vehicle type with their corresponding trip length / load / occupancy for any inconsistencies
The checked and corrected data were used for final analysis.
4.7.2 Zoning System
For analysis of data collected from the field, it is required to code them for developing origin and
destination matrices of trips. The local traffic needed to be assessed precisely, at the same time
‘through traffic’ and its geo-regional representation also should be assessed.
For the purpose of delineating the growth centers affecting the influence area, the entire country was
broadly divided into two regions. They are, Immediate Influence Area (IIA) and Broad Influence Area
(BIA) of the project.
While defining zone boundaries the following were considered:

 Important towns and industrial areas along or near the project road
 Important roads
 Administrative boundaries, e.g., district and state boundaries.
A total of 17 zones were considered along and close to the project corridor. Certain areas / districts /
states were considered separately and far off districts were clubbed together. These considerations
helped in arriving at 66 zones for the project. The zones are listed in Table 4-13 below.
Table 4-13: Adopted Zoning System for the study
Zone No. Zone Name District

1 Raas, Shree Cement
2 Bhil Deva
3 Jhalamand
4 Gopalpura
5 Babra, Ramgarh
6 Naya Gavo
Along the Project
7 Kolpura, Mohra
Road
8 Naharpura
9 Pratapgarh
10 Beawar
11 Mothi
12 Badhor
13 Asind


14 Bramhno Ki Sareri
15 Seeriyas
16 Baniyans
17 Mandal
18 Kumbhalgarh
19 Relmangra
Rajsamand
20 Amet
21 Deogarh
22 Ajmer,Pushkar
23 Kishangarh
24 Nasirabad Ajmer District
25 Bijainagar
26 Sarwar, Kekri
27 Pali
28 Sojat
29 Marwar
Pali Disstrict
30 Jaitaran, Raipur
31 Bali
32 Desuri
33 Sirohi
34 Pindwara Sirohi Disrict
35 Abu Road
36 Bhilwara
37 Shahpura, Jahazpur Bhilwara Disrict
38 Sahara, Raipur,Banera
39 Jaipur
40 Udaipur
41 Dungarpur
42 Banswara
43 Pratapgarh
44 Chittorgarh
45 Bundi, Kota, Baran, Jhalawar
Other districts of
46 Alwar, Bharatpur, Dhaulpur, Dausa, Karauli
Rajasthan
47 Tonk, Sawai Madhopur
48 Churu, Sikkar, Jhunjhunu
49 Hanumangarh,Ganganagar
50 Bikaner
51 Nagaur
52 Jodhpur
53 Barmer, Jalor
54 Gujarat
55 Maharashtra,Goa
56 Madhya Pradesh
57 Punjab Rest of India
58 Haryana
59 Delhi
60 Uttar Pradesh


61 Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh
62 Uttarakhand
63 Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu
64 Andhra Pradesh, Telangana
65 Bihar, Orissa, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh
66 Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland,Tripura, Meghalaya, Assam
4.7.3 Expansion Factors and development of O-D matrices
The OD details were collected from the trip makers during the survey on sample basis. Sampling varied
with the changes in traffic flow across the day. Care has been taken to eliminate any element of bias in
sampling. Since data was collected on sample basis, expansion factors are required to replicate the
pattern as reflected in the sample to the total number of vehicular trips made during the day. These
expansion factors are calculated separately for each class of vehicle. For example, if xc is number of cars
interviewed and Xc is the total number of cars counted during the day, then Xc/xc would be the
expansion factor for cars.
OD matrices are developed to assess the traffic movement pattern. These matrices actually speak about
distribution of trips for each zone as inter-zonal movements. The vehicle wise OD matrices are
developed by multiplying the sample OD matrix obtained from survey data with expansion factors.
Accordingly ten matrices, for different modes were developed for each survey location. OD matrices for
different vehicle type for project stretch at the survey locations are presented in Annexure 4.2 to this
report.
4.7.4 Lead Share
Table 4-14 & Table 4-15 depict the trip length distribution of each mode of vehicles at survey locations.
Table 4-14: Lead Distribution (%) for Passenger Vehicles
Vehicles 0-20 20-50 50-100 100-200 200-500 500-1000 >1000

Km 42.000_MDR-84
Car 4.1 1.9 63.7 23.0 4.1 3.2 0.0
Mini Bus 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Std. Bus 0.0 3.4 20.7 60.3 3.4 12.1 0.0
Passenger vehicles have lesser trip lengths, generally. The average trip length of cars is 100 km & 110
km and Buses travel about 100 km & 200 km on anaverage at first & second location respectively.
Table 4-15: Lead Distribution (%) for Goods Vehicles
State 0-20 20-100 100-200 200-500 500-1000 >1000

Km 42.000_MDR-84
LMV 12.9 44.6 29.7 12.9 0.0 0.0
LCV 9.4 33.4 43.9 9.4 4.0 0.0
2A 5.5 47.3 36.4 5.5 5.5 0.0
3A 0.0 27.8 50.0 7.4 11.1 3.7
MAV 2.2 9.7 47.8 21.6 17.9 0.7

The trip length spectrum shows that 15% of the bigger commercial vehicles are having trip length is
more than 500 km. Around 85% of LCVs are travelling less than 200 km.
4.7.5 Commodity Analysis
The different commodities recorded during the O – D survey have been classified in 17 categories as
presented in Table 4-16. Due consideration has been given to include all possible commodities and to
categorize them into homogeneous groups, accounting the pattern of movement along the corridor.
Table 4-16: Classification of Commodities
No. Commodity Type

Food grains and other agricultural products (Rice, wheat, pulses, maize, chilly, coconut,
1
sugarcane, sugar, cotton, coffee, tea, eggs etc.)
2 Fruits, vegetables – perishables
3 Wood and Forest Products
4 Petroleum, oil, Gas and lubricants product
5 Minerals, chemicals, fertilizer
6 Iron , Metal and steel
Finished and manufactured products (Vehicles, Products of machinery, rubber, electric &
7
electronics, textile, automobile, glass, plastic etc.)
8 Parcel Service & Containers
9 Medicines
10 Building materials (Brick, Tiles, cement, sand, marble and Blocks )
11 Mining (Sand, Bajri and Coarse Aggregate)
12 Cement
13 Marble stone
14 Textiles & Fibre
15 Coal
16 Miscellaneous goods ( Livestock, Waste, paper etc)
17 Empty vehicles
The percentage of each commodity mode-wise is given inbelow Table 4-17.
Table 4-17: Commodity Distribution
Vehicle Commodities in %
type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Km 147.000_SH-39
LMV 11.3 8.9 1.9 7.5 0.9 2.8 18.8 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.9 3.3 0.9 1.9 2.8 4.2 32.9
LCV 22.5 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 7.5 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.5
2A 4.3 23.9 0.0 10.9 0.0 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 15.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.0
3A 7.8 10.2 3.3 10.2 0.0 3.3 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 15.6 1.2 0.8 0.0 2.0 29.9
MAV 8.9 4.2 1.4 6.9 0.6 5.2 9.0 0.6 0.0 0.2 1.6 17.1 1.6 0.6 1.2 3.1 37.9

Vehicle Commodities in %
type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Average 11.0 9.4 2.8 7.1 0.3 3.8 13.8 0.1 0.0 0.2 1.6 11.7 0.8 0.7 0.8 1.9 34.0
Km 42.000_MDR-84
LMV 15.2 10.8 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.9 16.7 4.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.3 28.4
LCV 28.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 8.7 0.0 0.0 4.3 4.3 0.0 4.3 0.0 8.7 37.0
2A 9.6 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 14.9 0.0 0.0 13.2 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.0
3A 13.3 10.5 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 4.8 3.8 0.0 0.0 4.8 28.6 2.9 0.0 1.9 1.9 13.3
MAV 4.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 18.4 0.0 4.4 1.5 0.0 1.5 7.0 42.3 5.1 0.7 1.8 3.3 7.0
Average 14.2 4.9 0.6 0.6 7.0 0.6 7.4 6.7 0.0 0.5 6.0 17.2 1.6 1.0 0.7 5.0 25.7
Cement and Finished and manufactured products commodity have the highest share followed by food
grains transported along the project road.
4.7.6 Travel Pattern
Table 4-18 depict the travel pattern distribution of each mode of vehicles at survey locations.
Table 4-18: Distribution of Trip in the Project influence area
Three Multi-Axle
State/ Two Axle
Car Mini Bus Bus Mini LCV LCV Axle Vehicle (4
Vehicle Type Trucks
Trucks to 6 Axle)
Km 147.000_SH-39
Rajasthan 99.51% 100.00% 100.00% 99.12% 100.00% 100.00% 94.36% 88.41%
Rest of India 0.49% 0.00% 0.00% 0.88% 0.00% 0.00% 5.64% 11.59%
Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Km 42.000_MDR-84
Rajasthan 98.86% 0.00% 93.53% 98.65% 99.17% 90.99% 90.47% 91.04%
Rest of India 1.14% 0.00% 6.47% 1.35% 0.83% 9.01% 9.53% 8.96%
Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Weighted Average
Rajasthan 99.19% 100.00% 97.81% 98.89% 99.52% 93.65% 93.19% 89.04%
Rest of India 0.81% 0.00% 2.19% 1.11% 0.48% 6.35% 6.81% 10.96%
Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
From the above tables, it is observed that most of the trips originating or destined are from Rajasthan
state.
4.8 DATA ANALYSIS- TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SURVEY
Data analysis of turning movements at four junctions reveals that generally peak hours are staggered.
The intersection volume count data is presented in Annexure 4.3 to this report. Salient features of

intersection counts are presented in Table 4-19. Flow diagram for peak hour PCU and total PCU for all
the Junction is given in Figure 4-9 to Figure 4-10.
Table 4-19: Intersection Traffic on Major and Minor Road (Package – 2)
Name of Peak
Intersection
Total Traffic on Total Traffic on
Peak Hour Hour
Type of
S. Cross road Major Road Minor Road Recommendation as
Location Traffic
No per IRC: SP-41
(Morning and
LHS RHS PCU Veh's PCUs Veh's PCUs
Evening)
Priority Control (Give
1 Sanva Udaipur - 3-Arm 11:00 - 12:00 984 10558 17600 2760 3678
way or Stop Sign)
Deogarh Priority Control (Give
2 Haripura - 3-Arm 15:00 - 16:00 635 6747 7126 4904 4865
/ Pali way or Stop Sign)
Bhilwara
115
61
113
56
5
2
403 405
Udaipur
5
406 411
403
113
406
56
Peak Hour 09:00 - 10:00

Peak Hour Traffic
984
459
518
(PCU)
Beawar
Figure 4-9: Traffic flow during peak hour (PCUs) at Sanva Junction (km 103.570_MDR-84)

Bhilwara
1722
1956
1683
1892
40
65
65
6485 6549
Udaipur
40
7541 7581
1683
6485
1892
7541
Total Traffic
17704
8167
9433
(PCU)
Beawar
Figure 4-10: Traffic flow (PCUs) at Sanva Junction (km 103.570_MDR-84)
4.9 DATA ANALYSIS- PEDESTRIAN COUNT ANALYSIS
Pedestrian-vehicular conflict can be effectively studied through the indicator suggested in IRC 103-
1988, ‘Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities’. The code suggests some form of control measure at mid
blocks and intersections where the indicator PV2 is greater than or equal to 2 x 10^8. Where ‘P’ is the
peak hour pedestrian volume and ‘V’ is the number of vehicles in that peak hour. The analysis was
undertaken separately for each of the intersection where traffic surveys were conducted. A summary of
the peak values for PV2 and the hour in which the same is observed is presented in Table 4-20.
Table 4-20: Pedestrian-Vehicular Conflict
S. No. Location Chainage (km) Hour P V PV2/10^8

1 Badhor km 72.000_MDR-84 08.00:09.00 43 237 0.0024
2 Asind km 55.000_MDR-84 08.00:09.00 32 205 0.0013
It is observed that indicator PV2/10^8 is less than 1 in all the locations. In IRC: 103 – 1988, Guidelines for
Pedestrian Facilities. Therefore, it is concluded that control measure is not required at all locations.
4.10 DATA ANALYSIS- ACCIDENT DATA ANALYSIS
4.10.1 Black Spot Identification
project road in order to identify the major accident locations and accident black spots. The accidents
are grouped into four types based on their severity. They are:
 Fatal accidents

 Grievous injury
 Minor injury
 Non-injury
Based on above parameters the hazardous locations are identified. According to the revised definitions
issued by Ministry of Road Transport & Highways (MoRTH), Government of India, Road accident black
spot is a stretch of National Highway of about 500 mt. in length in which either 5 road accidents (In all
three years put together involving fatalities/grievous injuries) took place during the last 3 calendar
years or 10 fatalities (In all three years put together) took place during the last three calendar years.
Based on the analysis of the accident data, 2 locations were identified as black spot along the project
road as given below:
c. Harnia Mangri near Badnor (17 Fatalities)

d. Para Chowk near Asind (6 Fatal Accidents)
The major road accident locations are marked in the figure 4-11 given below and the details of the
number of accidents and the number of fatalities and grievously injured people are listed in Table 4-21
below.
Table 4-21: Major Accident location details
Sl Fatal Grievous Total Fatal / Minor Total

Accident Location
No Accidents Accidents Grievous Accidents Accidents Fatalities
1 Asan Ka Badiya_Badnor 1 1
2 Badnor 1
3 Balai Kheda 1 1 1
4 Bhagwanpura 1 1 2 1
5 Bhilon Ki Basti Mavla_Badnor 1 1
6 Bhim Chowraha 1 1
7 Bijaynagar Chowraha_Badnor 2 1
8 Brahmano Ki Sareri 1 1
9 Chatarpura, Badnor 2 1 3 2
10 Chotiyas Ke Pass 4 4 6
11 Dhunwala Mandal 1 1 1
12 Futiya Chowraha Kornas_Asind 1
Ganeshpura
13 1 1
Chowraha_Mandal
Guljar Farm House
14 1
Dhuvalan_Mandal
15 Haripura Chowraha 2
16 Harniya Mangri Chowraha 3 3 17
17 Jaswantpura 1 1
18 Jivliya Chowraha_Mandal 1
19 Kalichat_Asind 1 1 1
20 Kornas Chowraha 2 2 2
21 Lakshamipura Kotra_Badnor 1 1
22 Maharajpura Chowraha 1 2 3 1

Sl Fatal Grievous Total Fatal / Minor Total

Accident Location
No Accidents Accidents Grievous Accidents Accidents Fatalities
23 Mandal Pond/Puliya 2 2 2
24 Mawla 1 1 1
25 Mor ka Nimbahera 2 1 3 2 2
Mothi / Ojiyana /Rela
26 2 2 4 1 2
Chowraha
27 Para Chowraha 6 2 8 6
28 Peepli ka Wadiya 1 1 1
29 Rajiyavash Sahpura Chowraha 1 1
30 Sabalsagar_Badnor 5 4
31 Sarhad Sidiyash_Mandal 1 2
32 Sopura 1 1 2 2
33 Jagatiya Mor Ras
34 Babra Bus Stand Segregated accident data not available in police records
35 Bhagatpura, Ras 19 Accidents, 22 Fatalities, 10 Injured
36 Kolpura School
It has been observed that most of the accident locations are near curved sections of the project road
and near intersections. 3 fatal accidents took place near the first blackspot location of Harniya Mangri
Chowraha near Badnor which claimed the lives of 17 people. 6 fatal accidents and 2 grievous accidents
took place at the second black spot location of Para Chowraha near New Parasoli which claimed the
lives of 6 people and leaving 2 people seriously injured.

Figure 4-11: Accident Locations along Project Road

4.10.2 Recommendations for Safety
 Majority of the accidents have occurred near the intersections and curved sections. Thus, the most
effective control measures should be adopted for curbing these accidents. The intersections should
be designed properly providing sufficient turning radius, traffic islands and proper demarcation of
road markings.
 Adequate quantity of sign boards, markings and other control and cautionary devices should be
strictly installed along the corridor especially near junctions and curved sections.
 The signs should be invariably of retro-reflective and standard type helping the road users in the
night.
 The drivers may tend to increase the speed, hence necessary sign boards at proper intervals should
be erected warning about the changes on course of road, speed restriction, other hazards etc.
 The drivers should also be warned about the pedestrian activities along the project corridor, majorly
in urban areas and near major intersections by providing sign boards and zebra crossings at
junctions.
 All the blind spots should be removed or rectified by realignment of the highway or by clearing the
obstructions leading to lack of visibility.
 Bypasses should be planned to avoid major settlements were pedestrian vehicle conflicts are
common.

5 TRAFFIC DEMAND ESTIMATE AND TOLL REVENUE
5.1 ESTIMATION OF TRAFFIC GROWTH RATES BY ELASTICITY METHOD
Investment priorities are governed by traffic demand, assessed benefits and cost of the project.
Demand plays the important role, which governs which type of facility / infrastructure to be created.
This in turn determines likely benefits and costs to develop the same. A highway project of this nature
calls for significant investment. Prediction of traffic demand becomes an important task and has to be
carried out as accurately as possible. Accurate estimation of traffic has direct bearing on the viability of
the project. Recognizing this, efforts need to be made to carefully assess all the parameters that help in
predicting the traffic demand in future, which necessitates realistic estimation of traffic growth rates.
Traffic growth on a road facility is generally estimated on the basis of historical trends. In the present
case, traffic growth rates are estimated using elasticity method as per IRC-108-1996. Demand changes
are usually because of shifts in the pattern of economic activities in the surrounding regions. Hence,
future traffic estimation necessitates a preview, however imprecise, of the probable pattern of future
growth of the economy.
In the absence of historical traffic census data on the project road, the future traffic has been
forecasted using transport demand elasticity approach by regression of registered vehicles of Rajasthan
with respect to socio-economic parameters viz., population, PCI, NSDP and GDP as explained below.
5.2 TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY
The exercise of traffic growth rate estimation has been carried out by us using the elasticity approach.
The elasticity method relates traffic growth to changes in the related economic parameters. According
to IRC-108, 1996, elasticity based econometric model for highway projects could be derived in the
following form:
Log e (P) = A0 + A1 Log e (EI)
Where:
P = Traffic volume (of any vehicle type)
EI = Economic Indicator (GDP/NSDP/Population/PCI)
A0 = Regression constant;
A1 = Regression co-efficient (Elasticity Index)
The main steps followed are:
 Estimating the past elasticity of traffic growth from time series of registered vehicles of
influencing states
 Assessment of future elasticity values for major vehicle groups, namely, cars, buses and
trucks
 Study of past performance and assessment of prospective growth rates of state
economies of influence area
The growth rates are found using the formulae Eqn. (a) & (b).
For Passenger vehicles,

G=∑[(R*E*I)RJ]
……………….Eqn. (a)
Where Ri = Growth in PCI and Population index of Rajasthan and Rest of India

E = Elasticity Value
For commercial vehicles,
G=∑[(R*E*I)RJ,(R*E*I)RoI]
Eqn. (b)
Where,
R = Economic index (NSDP)

E = Elasticity Value
I = Influence factor
5.2.1 Project Influence Area
A study of the socio-economic profiles of the regions comprising the project influence area (PIA)
provides an overview of the factors likely to influence the pattern of economic development and hence
the flows and volumes of traffic on the proposed highway. The details include population, Per-capita
Income, NSDP, GDP and targeted growth rates of the economy. The profiles help to generate basic
inputs for the estimation of future growth in transport demand on the basis of past scenarios,
prospective changes in transport demand elasticity’s and economic growth rates. The share of
Rajasthan has been considered as 90% while 10% has been considered for the Rest of India for
commercial vehicles. For passenger vehicles, only the influence of Rajasthan has been considered.
5.3 GROWTH OF REGISTERED VEHICLES IN PROJECT INFLUENCE AREA
In order to analyze the vehicle growth in the state, the vehicle registration data of Rajasthan and India
have been collected. The Compounded Average Growth Rate (%) of different vehicle types is shown in
Table 5-1 to 5-2.
Table 5-1: Growth of Vehicle Registration in Rajasthan State
Year TW Car Bus Trucks

2004-05 3016763 409442 58092 208881
2005-06 3393916 460380 60979 229347
2006-07 3833746 515376 63320 269084
2007-08 4261695 579044 65605 297423
2008-09 4715835 646102 69298 318118
2009-10 5230454 727158 73257 346981
2010-11 5859719 824612 77980 385796
2011-12 6629743 934962 83345 431537
2012-13 7465863 1051288 88616 478379
2013-14 8331142 1168101 93892 467758
2014-15 9272233 1294542 97650 564152
CAGR 11.88 12.20 5.33 10.45
Source: Road Transport Year Book

Table 5-2: Growth of Vehicle Registration of Trucks (All India)
Year Trucks (All India)

2004-05 38,77,622
2005-06 42,74,984
2006-07 51,18,880
2007-08 56,00,938
2008-09 60,40,924
2009-10 64,31,926
2010-11 70,64,495
2011-12 76,58,391
2012-13 83,06,834
2013-14 86,97,541
2014-15 93,44,464
GR 9.19%
Source: Road Transport Year Book
5.4 ECONOMIC GROWTH OF THE STATES AND ALL-INDIA
The past performance of the economic indicators for the project influence area (PIA) was also collected
for the same period (2004-2011), with the objective of establishing elasticity of travel demand to the
different economic indicators. The economic indicators considered for the analysis include:
 Net State Domestic Product and Net National Domestic Product
 Per Capita Income (PCI)
 Population
Table 5-3 gives the growth of Economic indicators for Rajasthan.
Table 5-3: Growth of Economic Indices of Rajasthan at 2004-05 Prices
Year NSDP (Million) PCI Population

2004-05 11263572 18565 60670000
2005-06 12020228 19445 61818000
2006-07 13434991 21342 62951000
2007-08 14047148 21922 64077000
2008-09 15228354 23356 65200000
2009-10 16115948 24304 66310000
2010-11 18536565 27502 67401000
2011-12 20274905 29612 68468000
2012-13 21439120 30839 69519000
2013-14 22463210 31836 70559000
2014-15 23752978 33186 71576000
CAGR 7.75% 5.98% 1.67%
5.5 TRANSPORT ELASTICITY DEMAND
Description of Regression Analysis

The regression analysis tool performs linear regression analysis by using the "least squares" method to
fit a line through a set of observations. We can analyze how a single dependent variable is affected by

the values of one or more independent variables. In the present case, registered vehicles by type are
dependent variables whereas the economic parameters are independent variables.
T-statistic
The t-statistic is a measure of how strongly a particular independent variable explains variations in the
dependent variable. The larger the t-statistic, the better the independent variable’s explanatory power.
Next to each t-stat is a P-value. The P-value is used to interpret the t-stat. In short, the P-value is the
probability that the independent variable in question has nothing to do with the dependent variable.
Generally, we look for a P-value of less than .05, which means there is a 5% chance that the dependent
variable is unrelated to the dependent variable. If the P-value is higher than .10, a strong argument can
be made for eliminating this particular independent variable from a model because it “isn’t statistically
significant.”
R Square
R Square is another measure of the explanatory power of the model. In theory, R square compares the
amount of the error explained by the model as compared to the amount of error explained by averages.
The higher the R-Square, the better it is.
Regression analysis has been carried out by creating econometric models as suggested in IRC: 108 –
1996, using past vehicle registration data, and economic indicators such as population and PCI for
passenger vehicles and NSDP for freight vehicles. All India registered trucks are also regressed with GDP
to estimate national level elasticity value for trucks and its growth rate. The elasticity values obtained
for each class of vehicle are given in Table 5-4.
Table 5-4: Elasticity Values Derived Based on Regression Analysisfor Rajasthan
Vehicle Type Indicator Elasticity GR (%) R-square t-stat

PCI 0.187 0.669
11.285 0.997
Population 6.060 5.818
Two Wheeler Population 6.752 11.258 0.997 57.625
NSDP 1.424 11.532 0.991 31.650
PCI 1.800 11.382 0.987 25.750
PCI 0.324 1.452
11.780 0.998
Car NSDP 1.485 12.027 0.993 36.649
PCI 1.877 11.873 0.989 28.760
Population 7.037 11.733 0.998 68.685
PCI 0.369 1.321
5.464 0.989
Bus Population 3.245 5.411 0.987 25.790
PCI 0.869 5.495 0.985 23.973
NSDP 0.687 5.562 0.987 26.389
Trucks NSDP 1.218 9.859 0.986 24.805
5.6 RECOMMENDED ELASTICITY VALUES
Vehicle registration data represents all vehicles registered in the state, but does not indicate actual
number of vehicles plying on the road owing to vehicles taken off the
road due to lack of fitness certificate. Consequently, the elasticity values based on
registration data are usually higher than those based on actual traffic. Hence, there is a need to

moderate values obtained from registration data. In order to arrive at realistic future elasticity’s for the
project road; various factors relating to vehicle technology changes besides character of traffic and
travel pattern on the project road have been considered.
 High elasticity of cars being witnessed now is because of large demand facilitated by financing
schemes and loans. Factors like growth of household incomes (particularly in urban areas),
reduction in the prices of entry-level cars, growth of the used car market, changes in life style,
growing personal incomes, desire to own a vehicle facilitated by availability of loans/financing
schemes on easy terms, etc. have all contributed to the rapid growth in ownership of cars.
However, such trend would slow down and elasticity can be expected to decline. The elasticity
obtained by using registered vehicles is actually an overestimate for the traffic moving on sub-
urban and inter-city routes. In view of all this, combined with the travel pattern of vehicles
moving on the road, elasticity value obtained by using registration data has been moderated for
future years.
 Over the years, there is a change in passenger movement with more and more persons shifting
towards personalized modes. Moreover, buses are usually plying on fixed pre-decided routes
and thus elasticity values for buses have been considered accordingly.
 With the changing freight vehicle mix in favor of LCV for short distance traffic and 3-axle/MAV
for long-distance traffic, higher elasticity values for these have been considered as compared to
2-axle trucks. Considering the ongoing technical advancements in automobile industry, some of
the standard two axle trucks would gradually be replaced by three axle truck and MAVs, leading
to reduction in number of trucks. This shift has already started taking place in different parts of
the country.
Considering the Project Influence Area (PIA) and economic indicators Rajasthan, the projected elasticity
values for various vehicle types are presented in Table 5-5, which have been used to estimate the
growth rates of each vehicle type. The transport demand elasticity by vehicle type over a period of time
tends to decline and approach unity or even less. As the economy and its various sectors grow, every
region tends to become self-sufficient. Moreover, much of the past growth has been associated with
the country’s transition from a largely rural, subsistence economy to cash based urban economy,
dominated by regional and national linkages. As the transition proceeds, its impact on transport
pattern can be expected to become less dominant. Therefore, the demand for different type of vehicles
falls, over time, despite greater economic development. The same is also clear from the relationships of
the economy and transport demand elasticity over time nationally and internationally.
Table 5-5: Adopted Elasticity Values of Rajasthan State
Vehicle Type Indicator 2020-24 2025-29 2030-34 2035-39 2040-44 > 2044
Cars Population 5.63 5.35 5.08 4.83 4.59 4.36
2-wheelers Population 2.92 2.77 2.64 2.50 2.38 2.26
Buses Population 6.08 5.77 5.48 5.21 4.95 4.70
LCV NSDP 0.94 0.89 0.84 0.80 0.76 0.72
2 Axle NSDP 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78 0.74 0.70
3 Axle NSDP 0.90 0.86 0.81 0.77 0.73 0.70
MAV NSDP 0.88 0.84 0.80 0.76 0.72 0.68
Over the years there is a change in passenger movement with more and more people shifting towards
personalised modes. Moreover, the buses are usually plying on fixed pre-decided routes and thus
elasticity values for buses have been considered accordingly.
With the changing freight vehicle mix in favour of LCV for short distance traffic and MAVs for long-

distance traffic, higher elasticity values for these have been considered as compared to 2-axle and 3
axle trucks. Considering the on-going technical advancements in automobile industry, some of the
standard two axle trucks were getting replaced by three axle truck and MAVs over last few years,
further the three axle trucks also started replaced by MAVs in last few years leading to reduction in
number of trucks. But presently, production of new technology 2 and 3 axle trucks has been observed
and the same is expected to grow over a period of next few years. This shift has already been observed
in various areas of the country. The production trends of commercial vehicles in the country also depict
the increase in share of 2A and 3A trucks in last 2 years.
The Figure 5-1 shows the percentage changes in commercial vehicles, category-wise, in India from FY04
to FY17. The introduction of rigid body MAVs and 6-wheel LCVs have resulted in increased use of these
modes. These days the LCVs are used for even long-haul trips, contrary to their conventional usage. The
changes in vehicle technology, improved safety standards etc. have contributed to these shifts, but it is
clear from the chart below that the shift may have achieved equilibrium and plateaued over the recent
few years. However, for the purposes of our report, we have assumed that the shift continues.
Source: From various volumes published by SIAM
Figure 5-1: Trend of production of commercial vehicles in India
5.7 FUTURE ECONOMIC GROWTH
Against this background, any agenda for future growth of the state economies has to take into account
past trends, future prospects and the emerging challenges. The growth prospects for the state have
been developed taking into consideration the past performance of the state economies and the
economic growth envisaged for the future. The pace with which the regional economies grow with the
envisaged growth of the state is a major contributing factor in growth of traffic.
Various studies by economic houses, researchers and other observers like World Bank, CID1 of Harvard
University, EIU2, OECD3 etc. have published the forecast for GDP, from time to time. Observing the
trend and relation of NSDP to GDP in the past (Section 2.6) the forecast for future is framed carefully.
The past 10 years witnessed a lot of changes in economic front of the country. Considering that entire
block as a guiding factor may skew the values, and thus a short period of recent past (2012-15) has been
taken as guiding block duly considering the trend in various periods. This helps in framing the future
GDP values for smaller periods initially, like blocks of two and three years and subsequently for five
1
CID: Centre for International Development, Harvard University
2
EIU: Economic Intelligent Unit
3
OECD: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

years till 2059-60. Table 5-6 depicts the projection of GDP for horizon years.
Among the various GDP projections, OECD projection covers long term and is in line with recent trends
in growth. Thus, that series is adopted in the present study. The GDP suggested is considered for
factoring NSDP and the projections. The regions which out-performed the GDP in the past will continue
to do so, while others will follow the trends which are marked by their present trend as well as likely
changes in longer term.
As mentioned earlier, the government of India introduced a new series for GDP growth recently which
has changed the datum from FY05 to FY15 and the methodology of calculating the GDP also has been
changed. This made the historic values in the new series and projection of the old series difficult to
calculate, and moreover there is no data available for linking both. Thus the elasticities of different
modes are moderated considering the growth of both series in the overlapping period.
The prospective economy growth rate of the PIA states is presented in Table 5-6.
Table 5-6: Future Growth of Economic Indicators for Rajasthan and All India
Period Rajasthan All India

2020-24 6.90 5.90
2025-29 6.90 5.90
2030-34 6.90 5.90
2035-39 6.80 5.80
2040-44 6.50 5.50
> 2044 6.10 5.20
The estimated traffic growth rates are arrived at by multiplying elasticity values and growth in economic
factors, as tabulated in the table 5-7.
Table 5-7: Traffic Growth Rates (%)
Vehicle Type 2020-24 2025-29 2030-34 2035-39 2040-44 > 2044

Cars 7.04 6.02 5.15 4.40 3.76 3.22
2 wheelers 7.60 6.50 5.56 4.75 4.06 3.47
Buses 3.65 3.12 2.67 2.28 1.95 1.67
LCV 5.97 6.33 6.00 5.62 5.08 4.55
2-Axle Trucks 5.28 4.74 4.42 4.02 3.71 3.71
3-Axle Trucks 5.42 4.80 4.60 4.32 3.95 3.95
MAV 6.23 5.98 5.67 5.30 4.79 4.29
5.7.1 Diverted, Induced and Generated Traffic
Normal Traffic: The normal traffic which is presently plying on the project road.
Generated Traffic: Traffic which will come on project road, due to its up gradation
Diverted Traffic: Traffic that may divert to the alternative route due to toll imposed on the project
road and due to resultant
Total Traffic: The total Traffic will include generated traffic- diverted traffic (from/to the project road)
Diverted Traffic: There will be no diverted traffic as there is no alternate road exists.

Final Projected Traffic

The projected traffic is presented in Table 5-8 and the mode wise projected traffic is presented in
Annexure 5.1.
Table 5-8: Projected Total Traffic (PCU)
km 82 of MDR-84 km 62 of MDR-84
Year
Nos PCU Nos PCU
2018-19 3392 4327 4596 4714
2019-20 3627 4587 4922 5006
2020-21 3878 4864 5271 5318
2021-22 4148 5158 5645 5650
2022-23 4437 5471 6047 6005
2023-24 4746 5805 6478 6383
2024-25 5037 6128 6880 6745
2025-26 5346 6469 7307 7128
2026-27 5674 6830 7762 7533
2027-28 6023 7212 8245 7963
2028-29 6393 7617 8758 8419
2029-30 6737 8006 9232 8851
2030-31 7100 8415 9731 9306
2031-32 7483 8846 10258 9785
2032-33 7887 9300 10813 10289
2033-34 8312 9778 11399 10821
2034-35 8704 10233 11934 11320
2035-36 9114 10709 12495 11842
2036-37 9544 11207 13082 12390
2037-38 9994 11730 13697 12963
2038-39 10466 12278 14341 13564
2039-40 10895 12789 14923 14119
2040-41 11342 13322 15529 14698
2041-42 11808 13878 16161 15301
2042-43 12292 14458 16818 15930
2043-44 12797 15062 17502 16585
2044-45 13256 15628 18118 17191
2045-46 13731 16216 18757 17820
2046-47 14224 16826 19418 18472
2047-48 14734 17460 20102 19149
2048-49 15263 18119 20811 19851
2049-50 15811 18803 21546 20579
5.8 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Capacity analysis for Project Road has been carried out in order to define the Level of Service (LoS)

offered by road sections under the prevailing roadway and traffic conditions.
As per clause of MoRT&H Circular No. F.No. RW/NH-33044/37/2015/S&R® dated the 26th May 2016,
in light of changing socio-economic conditions in the country and in order to ensure the safe and
comfortable mobility of road users and reduction in road accidents, widening of road and decongestion
of traffic is required. Accordingly, ministry has revised the traffic at which the upgradation from 2-Lane
to 4-Lane will trigger, as indicated in Table 5-9 below.
Table 5-9: Design Service Volume (DSV) Standards
Traffic at which upgradation to

Traffic at which upgradation to
Nature of 2-Lane with Paved Shoulder will trigger (in
4-Lane will trigger (in PCU per Day)
Terrain PCU per Day)
Clause No - 2 Clause No - 4
Plain Irrespective of traffic thereon 10,000
Rolling Irrespective of traffic thereon 8500
Mountainous /
Irrespective of traffic thereon 6000
Steep
Table 5-10: Capacity Augmentation Year
Base Year Year in which

Section Proposed lane
Section Details Traffic in PCU Upgradation from 2 lane
No. configuration
(2018-19) to four lane will Tigger
4-Lane with Paved
Section I Ras-Beawar 8050 Year 2022-23
Shoulder
Section II Beawar- Lamba Not in Scope - -
2-Lane with Paved
Section III Lamba-Badnor 4327 Year 2034-35
Shoulder
Badnor-Haripura 2-Lane with Paved
Section IV 5068 Year 2030-31
Chowraha Shoulder
Haripura 4-Lane with Paved
Section V 7264 Year 2024-25
Chowraha-Mandal Shoulder
Based on the above Tables and projected traffic for the Project Corridor Section, it is proposed and
recommended that entire project road should be widened to a 2-Lane with Paved Shoulder except for
homogeneous section I which is to be made four lane facility. As projected traffic of HS-I will trigger for
four lane facility in next 4-6 year.
5.9 TOLL PLAZAS
There are three toll plaza locations proposed along project corridor. Details of the toll plazas are given
in Table 5-11 below.
Table 5-11: Proposed Toll Plaza Locations
Sl. Applicable
Location Tollable section Remark (Traffic Adopted)
No. Length (km)
1 Toll plaza 2 (Km 39.475) km 30.050 to km74.000 43.95 km 82.000 of MDR-84

In addition to the above, the fee levied and collected hereunder for structures or forming part of the
Project Highway, as the case may be, having length of more than 60 (sixty) meters as specified below
shall be due and payable for following Plaza(s) are listed in the Table 5-12:
Table 5-12: Proposed Structures
Sl. No. Location Structure Length (km)

1 Toll plaza 2 (Km 39.475) Major Bridge at km 71.760 0.150
In addition to the above fee shall be levied and collected for the following bypass forming part of the
Project Highway having cost of more than Rs. 10.0 crore as specified below shall be due and payable for
following Plaza(s) are listed in the Table 5-13
Table 5-13: Proposed Bypass
Sl. No. Location Bypass Section details Length (km)

Nil
5.10 TOLLABLE TRAFFIC
5.10.1 Discounts
The discounts allowed for local traffic/frequent users as per Fee Notification of NHAI are given
below.
(1) The executing authority or the concessionaire, as the case may be, shall upon request
provide a pass for multiple journeys to cross a toll plaza within the specified period at the
rates specified below
(2) A driver, owner or person in charge of a mechanical vehicle who makes use of the section
of national highway, permanent bridge, bypass or tunnel, may opt for such pass and he or
she shall have to pay the fee in accordance with the following rates, namely:
Maximum number of one

Amount Payable Period of Validity
way journeys allowed
One and half times of the fee for Twenty four hours from the
Two
one way journeys time of payment
Two-third of amount of the fee One month from date of
Fifty
payable for fifty single journeys payment
(3) A person who owns a mechanical vehicle registered for non-commercial purposes and uses
it as such for commuting on a section of national highway, permanent bridge, bypass or
tunnel, may obtain a pass, on payment of fee at the base rate for the year 2007-2008 of
rupees one hundred and fifty per calendar month and revised annually, authorizing it to
cross the toll plaza specified in such pass:
Provided that such pass shall be issued only if such driver, owner or person in charge of
such mechanical vehicle resides within a distance of twenty kilometers from the toll plaza
specified by such person and the use of such section of national highway, permanent
bridge, bypass or tunnel, as the case may be, does not extend beyond the toll plaza next to
the specified toll plaza.

Provided further that no such pass shall be issued if a service road or alternative road is
available for use by such driver, owner of person in charge of a mechanical vehicle.
(4) A person who owns Commercial vehicle (excluding vehicle plying under National permit),
registered with address on the registration certificate of a particular district and uses such
vehicle for commuting on a section of the national Highway, permanent bridge, tunnel or
bypass, as the case may be, which is located within district, shall be levied user fee on all
toll plazas which are located within that district, at the rate of fifty percent of the
prescribed rate of fee.
(5) No pass shall be issued of fee collected from a driver, owner or person in charge of a
mechanical vehicle that uses part of the section of a national highway and does not cross a
toll plaza
5.10.2 Tollable Component
The adopted tollable component at all toll plaza locations for the toll revenue estimation is listed in
Table 5.14 below.
Table 5-14: TOLLABLE COMPONENT OF EACH MODE OF VEHICLE
Mode of Frequency
Categories TP-1 TP-2 & TP-3
Vehicle Factor
Upto 20km Travel 13.4 1.9 2.00
Through Monthly 30.9 1.0 1.67
Car/Jeep
Through daily (One entry) 34.0 65.0 1.00
Through daily (reentry) 21.7 32.1 2.00
Taxi Through daily (reentry) 54.2 20.4 2.00
Local Registered
2.1 3.9 1.00
Through daily (One entry)
Monthly Pass 9.0 0.3 1.67
Mini Bus Through daily (reentry) 35.2 21.7 2.00
Local Registered
2.8 3.9 1.00
Std. Pvt. Bus Through daily (reentry) 35.2 21.7 2.00
Local Registered
2.8 3.9 1.00
Goods Pick
Up
Local Registered
1.7 2.6 1.00
LCV

Mode of Frequency
Categories TP-1 TP-2 & TP-3
Vehicle Factor
Local Registered
2.6 2.6 1.00
2 Axle Trucks Through daily (reentry) 54.6 58.2 2.00
Local Registered
1.8 1.8 1.00
3 Axle Trucks Through daily (reentry) 43.7 48.1 2.00
Local Registered
2.2 2.6 1.00
4 to 6Axle
Trucks
Local Registered
2.8 3.0 1.00
The Projected tollable traffic under different toll paying categories from 2019 to 2050 has been given in
Table 5-15 to 5-16.
Table 5-15: Projected Tollable Traffic at TP-2
Car/ Taxi / 4-Axle Total

Minib Std. Goods 2- 3-
year Jeep/ Shared LCV and 6
us Bus Pickup Axle Axle Nos PCU
Van Jeep Axle
2018-19 274 117 1 78 187 46 94 123 284 1204 2812
2019-20 293 125 1 81 198 49 99 130 302 1278 2979
2020-21 314 134 1 84 210 52 104 137 320 1356 3152
2021-22 336 143 1 87 223 55 110 144 340 1439 3338
2022-23 360 154 1 90 236 58 115 152 362 1528 3538
2023-24 385 164 1 93 250 62 122 160 384 1621 3747
2024-25 408 174 1 96 266 65 127 168 407 1712 3951
2025-26 433 185 1 99 283 69 133 176 432 1811 4174
2026-27 459 196 1 102 300 73 140 184 457 1912 4401
2027-28 486 208 1 105 319 79 146 193 485 2022 4648
2028-29 516 220 1 108 340 83 153 202 514 2137 4905
2029-30 542 232 1 111 360 89 160 212 543 2250 5162
2030-31 570 243 1 114 382 94 167 222 574 2367 5430
2031-32 600 256 2 118 405 99 174 232 606 2492 5712
2032-33 630 269 2 121 429 105 182 242 640 2620 6005
2033-34 663 283 2 125 455 112 190 254 677 2761 6324
2034-35 692 296 2 127 480 118 198 264 713 2890 6624
2035-36 723 309 2 130 507 125 206 276 750 3028 6941

Car/ Taxi / 4-Axle Total

Minib Std. Goods 2- 3-
year Jeep/ Shared LCV and 6
us Bus Pickup Axle Axle Nos PCU
Van Jeep Axle
2036-37 754 322 2 133 536 132 214 288 790 3171 7273
2037-38 788 336 2 136 566 139 223 300 832 3322 7623
2038-39 822 351 2 139 597 147 232 313 876 3479 7988
2039-40 853 364 2 142 628 154 240 326 918 3627 8333
2040-41 885 378 2 145 660 162 249 338 962 3781 8693
2041-42 918 392 2 147 693 171 258 352 1008 3941 9071
2042-43 953 407 2 150 728 180 268 366 1056 4110 9466
2043-44 989 422 2 153 765 188 278 380 1107 4284 9876
2044-45 1021 436 2 156 800 197 288 395 1155 4450 10269
2045-46 1054 450 2 158 837 206 299 411 1204 4621 10675
2046-47 1087 464 2 161 875 215 310 427 1256 4797 11097
2047-48 1122 479 2 163 915 224 322 444 1310 4981 11538
2048-49 1159 495 2 166 956 236 334 461 1366 5175 11997
2049-50 1196 511 2 169 1000 246 346 480 1424 5374 12472
5.11 TOLL REVENUE ESTIMATES
The summary of annual toll revenue estimate is presented in Table 5-16 below:
Table 5-16: Revenue Summary (Rs. Crores)
Year Revenue from Toll plaza @ km 39.475 TP-2

Apr-18 Mar-19 3.25
Apr-19 Mar-20 3.62
Apr-20 Mar-21 4.01
Apr-21 Mar-22 4.44
Apr-22 Mar-23 4.98
Apr-23 Mar-24 5.52
Apr-24 Mar-25 6.05
Apr-25 Mar-26 6.77
Apr-26 Mar-27 7.49
Apr-27 Mar-28 8.33
Apr-28 Mar-29 9.19
Apr-29 Mar-30 10.27
Apr-30 Mar-31 11.21
Apr-31 Mar-32 12.51
Apr-32 Mar-33 13.87
Apr-33 Mar-34 15.23
Apr-34 Mar-35 16.87
Apr-35 Mar-36 18.65
Apr-36 Mar-37 20.41
Apr-37 Mar-38 22.53
Apr-38 Mar-39 25.00
Apr-39 Mar-40 27.48

Year Revenue from Toll plaza @ km 39.475 TP-2

Apr-40 Mar-41 30.26
Apr-41 Mar-42 33.27
Apr-42 Mar-43 36.52
Apr-43 Mar-44 40.08
Apr-44 Mar-45 44.23
Apr-45 Mar-46 48.46
Apr-46 Mar-47 52.98
Apr-47 Mar-48 58.36
Apr-48 Mar-49 63.88
Apr-49 Mar-50 70.09

6 DESIGN STANDARDS
6.1 GENERAL
The design standards for the project road have been set from IRC SP 73-2015 “Manual of Specifications
and Standards for Two-Laning of Highways with Paved shoulders” and IRC SP 84-2014 “Manual of
Specifications and Standards for Four-Laning of Highways through public private partnership.
6.2 HIGHWAY DESIGN STANDARDS
Table 6-1: Design Standards
Design speed 100 - 80 km/hr

1 Max – Min
Plain & Rolling 80 - 65 km/hr*
2 Lane width 3.5 m
3 Paved shoulder width 2.5 m
4 Earthen Shoulder Width 1.5 m
5 Shy away on median edge 0.5 m
6 Shy away on outer/other edges 0.25 m
Flexible Rigid
Carriageway 2.5 % 2.0 %
7 Cross-slopes
Paved shoulder 2.5 % 2.0 %
Unpaved shoulder 3.0 % 3.0 %
8 Maximum super elevation 7.0 %

For 100 km/hr 400 m
Minimum horizontal curve radius
9 
For 80 km/hr 240 m

For 65 km/hr 150 m

For 100 km/hr 1800 m
Radii beyond which super
10
elevation not required

For 80 km/hr 1100 m

For 65 km/hr 750 m
 For Plain and rolling >1 in 150
11 Super elevation runoff rate  For mountainous &
steep >1 in 60
12 Transition curves to be used with length of spiral equal to length of super elevation runoff
For curve radius
Extra widening of carriageway on >300m Nil
13
curves 101 to 300m 0.6m
75 to 100m 0.9m
Gradient
 2.5 %, 3.3 %
 Plain and Rolling Ruling &
14  5.0 %, 6.0 %
 Mountainous Limiting
 6.0 %, 7.0 %
 Steep
Max. grade change
min. curve
Design Speed not requiring
Minimum Length of Vertical length
curve
15 Curves / Grade change not
100 km/hr 60m 0.5%
requiring vertical curve
80 km/hr 50m 0.6%
65 km/hr 40m 0.8%
16 Vertical curve ‘K’ values For design Speed Crest Sag

Crest vertical curve/Sag vertical 100 km/hr 74 42

curve 80 km/hr 33 26
65 km/hr 19 18
5.5 m minimum
Road Under/Overpass 8.50 m minimum
ROB Electric traction 7.30 m minimum
ROB Non-electric traction
Lines carrying low voltage
17 Vertical clearance up to 110V
5.5 m minimum
Electric power lines up to
650V
6.0 m minimum
Electric power lines >
650V
6.5 m minimum
* Existing alignment with design speed of 65kmph in Built-up areas is retained to minimize the
cost of the project
6.3 CROSS SECTIONAL ELEMENTS
Table 6-2: Summary of Cross sectional Elements
Carriageway Paved Granular Footpath/

TCS Description
(m) Shoulder Shoulders Lined Drain
Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (widening &
8 7 2.5*2 1.5*2 -
Reconstruction of Existing Pavement)
Two Lane with Paved Shoulder
9 7 2.5*2 - 2.0*2
(Reconstruction/ New Construction with Drain)
10 Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Bypasses New 7 2.5*2 1.5*2 -
Construction)
Two lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction/
11 New Construction in Hilly Area with Both side 7 1.5*2 - Varies
Hill)
Two lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction/ 1.0 (on
12 New Construction in Hilly Area with one side 7 1.5*2 Valley Varies
Hill and one side valley) Side)
ROB and VUP Approach for Two Lane Road with
13 7 2.5*2 - -
RE wall
14 Cross Sections at Major Bridges and RoB 13 - - 2.0*2
Two Lane Flyover approach with retaining
15 7 2.5*2 - -
structure and Service Road on both sides
The proposed cross sections for the project road are given in Figure 6-1 to Figure 6-11.

Figure 6-1: Typical Cross Section 8 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction – Existing Pavement )
Figure 6-2:Typical Cross Section 9 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction/ New Construction with Drain)

Figure 6-3:Typical Cross Section 10 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Bypass – New Construction)
Figure 6-4:Typical Cross Section 11 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction / New Construction – In Hilly area)

Figure 6-5:Typical Cross Section 12 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Reconstruction/ New Construction in Hilly Area)
Figure 6-6:Typical Cross Section 13 : Two lane carriageway with Paved Shoulder (VUP/ ROB Approach with RE wall)

Figure 6-7:Typical Cross Section 14 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (Major Bridge/ROB)
Figure 6-8 : Typical Cross Section 15 : Two Lane with Paved Shoulder (VUP Approach with Retaining structure and Service Road)

Figure 6-9 : Embankment (Height More Then 3m) With Core Of Fly Ash for Filling sections
Figure 6-10 : Embankment (Height More Then 3m) With Core Of Fly Ash for Four Lane VUP/ROB Approach with Retaining Structure

Figure 6-11 : Embankment (Height More Then 3m) With Core Of Fly Ash for Two Lane VUP/ROB Approach with Retaining Structure

6.4 TCS SCHEDULE
Typical cross section schedules are prepared considering various parameters, such as geometry,
pavement condition, structural strength, bypasses and realignments.
Table 6-3: TCS Schedule

No From To
1 30050 30650 600 8
2 30650 31670 1020 10 Forest
3 31670 31800 130 11 Forest
4 31800 36050 4250 8 Forest
5 36050 37100 1050 10
6 37100 37300 200 8
7 37300 37600 300 9
8 37600 39300 1700 8
9 39300 39650 350 Toll Plaza
10 39650 39700 50 8
11 39700 40000 300 9
12 40000 40600 600 8
13 40600 40800 200 12
14 40800 41800 1000 8
15 41800 41960 160 11
16 41960 43000 1040 8
17 43000 43480 480 10
18 43480 43600 120 11
19 43600 44000 400 10
20 44000 45600 1600 8
21 45600 45850 250 9
22 45850 47000 1150 8
23 47000 48630 1630 10
24 48630 49600 970 8
25 49600 49800 200 10
26 49800 50060 260 11
27 50060 50700 640 10
28 50700 54100 3400 8
29 54100 54730 630 9
30 54730 59770 5040 10
31 59770 60250 480 8
32 60250 61350 1100 15 VUP-II
33 61350 68820 7470 8
34 68820 70000 1180 9
35 70000 70020 20 8
36 70020 70850 830 10
Service road with at
37 70850 71400 550 15
grade separator
38 71400 71550 150 15 VUP-II

No From To
39 71550 71685 135 10
40 71685 71835 150 13 Major Bridge
41 71835 72600 765 9
42 72600 73600 1000 15 VUP-II
43 73600 74000 400 8
* Note 1: The chainage of NH-158, are discontinued at overlapping sections with other NH, such as
NH-8, NH-14 and Parsoli bypass overlaps with NH-148D (Bhim to Gulabpura) and continued with
same chainage of at the end of overlapping sections.
* Note2: # Existing cross section of ROB with approaches is to be maintained
6.5 SERVICE ROAD
Service Road Locations are finalized considering the possibility of the diversion of the traffic. The Service
Road Locations are given in Table 6-4.
Table 6-4: List of Service Roads
SR. Service Road Design Chainages Village

No. From TO Length
1 60250 61350 1100 Near Kolpura
2 70850 71400 550 Asind
3 71400 71550 150 Asind
4 72600 73600 1000 Asind
Total 2800
Summary of Widening Scheme is given in Table 6-5.
Table 6-5: Summary of widening Scheme
Sr No. Improvement Type Length (m)

1 2 lane with paved shoulder
Overlay 0
New Construction 11425
Reconstruction 29225
Two lane with service road 550
ROB/VUP approach with Flexible pavement 2250
Major Bridges and RoB’s 150
Toll plaza 350
2 Total project length (km) 43.950
6.6 EMBANKMENT DESIGN
Embankment has been designed for ensuring the stability of the roadway. High embankments (height
6m or above) in all soils has been designed from stability consideration as per IRC-75, IRC SP-58 &
MORTH-Guidelines for Design of High Embankments. The sections with high embankments are listed
below in Table 6-6 & Table 6-7.

Table 6-6: High Embankment Section, LHS
Design Chainage Average

Length (m) Remarks TCS Proposed
Start End Embankment Height
31540 31650 7.63 110 Box Culvert 10
43610 43790 7.50 180 Rolling Terrain 10
49570 49870 8.13 300 Rolling Terrain 8/10/11
71600 71760 6.57 160 Major Bridge 10/13
Table 6-7: High Embankment Section, RHS
Design Chainage Average

Length (m) Remarks TCS Proposed
Start End Embankment Height
31520 31590 6.78 70 Box Culvert 10
33300 33360 7.08 60 Rolling Terrain 8
43590 43760 6.81 170 Rolling Terrain 11/10/11
49670 49780 7.79 110 Rolling Terrain 10
71580 71710 6.29 130 Due to major Bridge 10/13
6.7 TOE WALL/BREAST WALL/RETAINING WALL
Earth retaining structures such as toe wall, retaining wall, breast wall etc. shall be provided at following
locations as per site requirement. Locations given in Table 6-8 indicates minimum requirement and shall
be provided at other locations as per site conditions.
Table 6-8: Locations of Earth Retaining Structures
LHS RHS
Design Chainage Design Chainage
Length (m) Length (m)
Start End Start End
31550 31660 110 31450 31570 120
31820 31940 120 33310 33370 60
39190 39310 120 39220 39340 120
43310 43390 80 43120 43160 40
43620 43790 170 43320 43390 70
44530 44600 70 43600 43820 220
49500 49770 270 44530 44580 50
47250 47350 100
49680 49760 80
50090 50130 40
Total 16570 Total 13880
6.8 PAVEMENT DESIGN
The pavement design proposed is Rigid Pavement for Km 0+000 to 30+050 and flexible pavement for
Km 30+050 to Km 116+745. The flexible pavement design and rigid pavement has been done in

accordance to IRC 37-2018 and IRC 58-2015 respectively. The overlay proposal has been designed
according to IRC 81-1997 based on Benkelman beam survey.
6.9 ROAD & TRAFFIC SIGNS
6.9.1 Signage Plans
Proper signing and striping (delineation) are very critical for the safety and guidance of a driver. Signage
plans showing the guide signs, and regulating signs at all appropriate locations have been developed.
Guide signs showing the locations of and distance to all major crossings, towns and villages have been
installed at the appropriate locations. Regulatory signs, including the speed limit sign, toll signs and
signs for traffic have been installed at appropriate locations. The signs have been reflector type so that
they can be seen easily in the dark.
Also, the guide signs at major junctions have been illuminated type and have been mounted on poles so
that they can be easily seen. The lettering size used for designing the signs and location of signpost has
been based on the proposed design speed and clear visibility. The material specified for manufacturing
signs has been based on international standards. Use of reflectors has been made, so that the lanes are
clearly visible at nighttime. Different reflectors have been used for the medians striping and the lane
striping so that the opposite traffic can be properly guided.
6.9.2 Road Signs
All road signs are proposed to be provided conforming to standards of “Code of Practice for Road Signs”
(IRC: 67-2012) and “New Traffic Signs” (IRC: SP: 31-1992) Latest type of reflective and fluorescent sign
boards, in appropriate sizes, have been installed. The signs are broadly categorized as below:
(i) Mandatory/Regulatory Signs: These signs are mostly for giving instructions and are mostly
circular generally red and blue colors and sign shown in black or white.
(ii) Cautionary/Warning Signs: They are mostly triangular with red border and black sign.
(iii) Informatory Signs: These are mostly rectangular with blue or green background and sign in
white. Advance direction sign can be mounted on steel, brass portal frame fixed across the
carriageway at a height of 5.5 m above the pavement grade at the center of roadway and visible
from a distance for the vehicles approaching.
6.10 ROAD SAFETY
Road safety is being taken in the consideration during design to minimize the risk of accidents likely to
occur/occurring on the project facility and to minimize their severity. To ensure road safety, designer
should consider the factors like sight distance, curvature design, design speed, road sign and pedestrian
safety. Road Safety issues that have been integrated with the design are mentioned below:
1. Choice of route options
2. Alignment and ease of achieving design standards
3. Standards and cross-section
4. Junction Improvements
5. Road Furniture, Road marking and signs
6. Provision of Bus and Truck Bays
7. Drainage
8. Provision of footpath in the built-up section
Road Safety and Traffic Calming schedule is provided in Annexure 6.1.

6.11 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR STRUCTURES
6.11.1 General
This section deals with the standards to be adopted in design of vis-à-vis ROBs, flyovers, bridges,
underpasses and culverts. It also provides for the type of materials and their specifications that would
be adopted for the above structures, the loads and forces to be considered.
It is intended that the project road will accommodate 4-lane divided traffic at present and to be
widened to 6 lanes at a later stage if required. IRC: 78-2014 will be followed for foundation and
substructure.
6.11.2 Cross-sectional Elements
a) Structural width for bridges / flyovers / road over rail bridges
The structural width for all bridges is being kept the same and the entire formation width will be
carried out on to the structure. The overall width of new bridges shall be same as the roadway width
of the approaches (IRC: SP 73-2015, CL.3).
b) Median width
A median width of 4.0 m will be maintained between two outer faces of RCC crash barriers for rural
sections and 1.0 m for urban section. The safety barrier on the open median side shall be provided at
a clear distance of 0.5m from the edge of carriageway.
c) Utility service
Any utility service to be carried by the structure shall be specified in schedule ‘B’ of the Concession
agreement.
d) All the new structures shall be designed for the condition when footpath is used as carriageway.
The foot path portion may be provided at the same level as the bridge carriageway and
separated by crash barrier in non built- up areas. In built –up areas, raised footpath shall be
provided.
e) All the components of the structures shall be designed for a service life of 100 years except
appurtenances like crash barriers, wearing surfaces and rubberized components in expansion
joins and elastomeric bearings. All the requirements to achieve durability and serviceability
shall be implemented.
f) Width of Bridges
All the new bridges shall have a footpath on left side of the traffic. The typical cross section for new
bridge with footpath should be as per IRC: 84-2019, Cl 7.3, Fig 7.2.
If the daily traffic in PCU’s exceeds 30,000 at the time of feasibility study/bidding, the width of new
bridge shall be as per Six-lane standards. Such Bridges shall be indicated in schedule ‘B’. The typical
cross section for new bridge with footpath should be as per IRC: 84-2019, Cl 7.3, Fig 7.3.

6.11.3 Specification for Material
a) Concrete: The grades of concrete will be either equal to or higher than those prescribed in
IRC: 112-2011 Grade of concrete in various structural elements shall be for moderate
conditions of exposure.
Superstructure
PSC Members M 45
RCC T-Girder and Deck Slab M 35
RCC Approach Slab M 30
RCC Crash Barriers M 40
Substructure
RCC substructures and foundations M 35

Leveling course of PCC below foundation M 10
Pedestals for bearings
Pedestal M 40
Bearings Pot-PTFE/Electrometric
b) Steel: This shall conform to provisions given in IS: 1786, IS: 432 (Part I).
Reinforcement steel
Thermo mechanically treated fusion bonded epoxy coated bars conforming to Fe 500/ TMT.
Pre-stressing steel
These should conform to IS: 14268-1995
System: 12.7mm low relaxation multiple strands system
Cables: 12T13 /15T13 /19T13, systems with strands of 12.7 mm nominal diameters.
Sheathing: 90 mm / 85mm / 75mm Corrugated HDPE sheathing duct.
c) Bearings
Elastomeric bearings
Elastomeric bearing shall be provided under RCC Girder and RCC solid slab type superstructures as
per IRC: 83 (Part II) and shall confirm to clause 2005 of MoRTH specification for Road and Bridge
Works.
POT cum PTFE bearings
POT cum PTFE bearings shall be provided where there is requirement to cater for large loads. This
shall conform to IRC: 83 (Part III) and clause 2006 of MoRTH specifications for Road & Bridge works.
d) Expansion Joints
Strip seal type expansion joints shall be provided on all the bridges and ROBs as per Clause No.
2607 of MoRTH specification for road and bridge works and interim specifications for expansion
joints issued subsequently vide MoRTH letter no. RW/NH-34059/1/96-S&R dated 25.01.2001 and
addendum there to circulated vide letter of even no; dt. 30.11.2001.

In case of bridges with smaller spans Polysulphide seal type expansion joint shall be
provided.
6.11.4 Loads and Forces to be considered in Design
 Vertical Loads
a) Dead Loads
Following unit weights shall be assumed in the design as per IRC Codes.
Pre-stressed Concrete - 2.50 t / m3

Reinforced Concrete - 2.50 t / m3
Plain Cement Concrete - 2.20 t / m3
Structural steel - 7.85 t / m3
Dry Density of Backfill Soil - 1.80 t / m3
Saturated Density of Backfill Soil - 1.90t / m3
b) Superimposed Dead Loads
Wearing coat: 65mm thick Bituminous [25 Mastic asphalt + 40 BC] with total 0.2 t / m 2 (2.2 t /
cum for 11.0 m wide c / way including allowance for an overlay).
PQC layer: As per Pavement Design
Crash barriers: From design (i.e. 1.0 t / m / side)
c) Live Loads
Carriageway live loads: The following load combinations will be considered in the analysis and
whichever produces the worst effect will be considered.
One / Two / Three lanes of IRC Class A
One lane of IRC Class 70R (wheeled/ tracked)
One lane of IRC Class 70R (wheeled) with one lane of IRC Class A
One lane of IRC Class SV Loading
Minimum clear distance between 70R vehicle and Class A vehicle, when placed side by side in
combination, shall be 1.2 m for design.
Resultant live load stresses shall be reduced by 10% in case all the three lanes are loaded i.e. in
case of three lanes of IRC Class ‘A’ or one lane of IRC Class 70R with one lane of IRC Class A.
Impact factor shall be as per Cl. 211 of IRC: 6:2017 for the relevant load combinations. For
simplicity in design, Impact factor for continuous structures shall be calculated for the smallest
span of each module and used for all the spans of that module.
d) Horizontal Forces
a) Longitudinal Forces due to live load
Following effects shall be considered in the design

Braking forces as per the provision of Cl. 214 of IRC:6-2017
Distribution of longitudinal forces due to horizontal deformation of bearings/frictional resistance
offered to the movement of free bearings as per Cl. 214.5 of IRC:6-2017
b) Horizontal forces due to water currents
The portion of bridge, which may be submerged in running water, shall be designed to sustain
safely the horizontal pressure due to force of water current as per the stipulations of Cl. 213 of IRC:
6 -2014
c) Earth load
 Earth forces shall be calculated as per the provisions of Cl. 217 of IRC:6-2017 assuming the
following soil properties:
Type of soil assumed for backfilling: As per Appendix 6 of IRC: 78 -2014 with dry density of 2.07 t /
m3 and submerged density of 1.2 t / m3.
Angle of Internal Friction : Φ= 30O
Angle of Wall Friction : δ = 20O
Coefficient of Friction ‘µ‘ at base : tan (2/3 Φ), while Φ is the angle of internal
friction of substrata immediately under the foundations.
 Live load surcharge shall be considered as per the provisions of IRC: 6 ,Cl 217.1. All abutment and
return walls shall be designed for a Live load surcharge equivalent to 1.2m earth fill.
d) Centrifugal forces
Centrifugal forces shall be calculated as per the provisions of Cl. 215 of IRC:6-2017 for a design
speed applicable at horizontal curves.
e) Wind effect
Structures shall be designed for wind effects as stipulated in Cl. 212 of IRC:6-2017. The wind forces
shall be considered in the following two ways and the one producing the worst effect shall govern
design.
Full wind forces at right angles to the superstructure
65% of wind force as calculated in (i) above acting perpendicular to the superstructure and 35%
acting in traffic direction.
f) Seismic Effect
The road stretch is located in Seismic Zone-II as per the revised seismic map of India (IS: 1893-
2002). The seismic forces will be coefficient method as suggested by the modified clause for the
interim measures for seismic provisions (Cl.222 of IRC:6-2017) published in Indian Highways,
January 2003.
e) Other Forces / Effects
Temperature effects
The bridge structure / components i.e. bearings and expansion joints, shall be designed for a
temperature variation of + 250 C considering extreme climate.
The superstructures shall also be designed for effects of distribution of temperature across the
deck depth as given in Fig. 10 of IRC:6-2017, suitably modified for the surfacing thickness.

Temperature effects shall be considered as follows:
Effects of non-linear profile of temperature shall be combined with 50% live load and full value of
‘E’ shall be considered.
Effects of global rise and fall of temperature shall be combined with 100% live load and full value of
‘E’ shall be considered.
Differential shrinkage effects

A minimum reinforcement of 0.2% of cross sectional area in the longitudinal direction of the cast-
in-situ slab shall be provided to cater for differential shrinkage stresses in superstructures with
cast-in-situ slab over precast girders as per Clause 605.2 of IRC: 22 - 1986.
However, effects due to differential shrinkage and / or differential creep shall be duly accounted
for in the design.
Construction stage loadings / effects

A uniformly distributed load of 3.6 KN /m2 of the form area shall be considered to account for
construction stage loadings in the design of superstructure elements, wherever applicable, as per
Cl. 4.2.2.2.2 of IRC: 87 - 1984.
Buoyancy
100% buoyancy shall be considered while checking stability of foundations irrespective of their
resting on soil/weathered rock / or hard rock. However, the maximum base pressures shall also be
checked under an additional condition with 50% buoyancy in cases where foundations are
embedded into hard rock. Pore pressure uplift limited to 15% shall be considered while checking
stresses of the substructure elements.
f) Load Combinations to be considered in Design
All members shall be designed to sustain safely the most critical combination of various loads and
forces that can coexist. Various load combinations as relevant with increase in permissible stresses
considered in the design shall be as per Clause 202 of IRC:6-2017 and Clause 706 of IRC: 78 – 2014.
In addition, the stability of bridge supporting two superstructures (with an expansion joint) shall be
checked under one span dislodged condition also.
g) Exposure Condition
Moderate exposure conditions shall be considered while designing various components of the
bridge.
h) Design Codes
The main design criteria being adopted is to evolve design of a safe structure having good
durability conforming to the various technical specifications and sound engineering practices.
Various codes of practices referred to, are as under:
IRC: 5 - 2015
IRC: 6- 2017

IRC: 112 - 2011
IRC: 22 – 1986
IRC: 40 – 1995
IRC: 45 – 1972
IRC: 54 – 1974
IRC: 78 – 2014
IRC: 83 – 1987(Part II)
IRC: 83 – 2002 (Part I-III)
IRC: SP 13 - 2004
IS 1893 – 2002 (Part-I)
i) Load combinations
The various load combinations to be considered are as per provisions of IRC:6-2017

.

7 ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES
7.1 WIDENING PROPOSAL
The present traffic scenario from Ras-Mandal accounts for widening to two lanes with paved shoulder
and granular shoulders. No four lane sections are proposed as the project road passes through small
settlements. Concentric widening is adopted in most of the project length to restrict land acquisition to
minimum. The details of improvements are dealt in this Chapter.
7.2 GEOMETRIC IMPROVEMENTS
7.2.1 Alignment
As per the Gazette notification of MORTH the alignment of NH-158 is formed with combination of SH-
39, Shree cement road, NH-8, MDR-84 and SH-61. The alignment of through SH-39, MDR-84 and SH-61
is retained with bypasses as per the requirements of Manual for Specifications and Standards.
Shree Cement Road provides connectivity to SH-39 & NH-8 for bypassing the Beawar City as per Gazette
Notification.Sub-sequent site visits with Authority regarding the alignment, and considering the
alternative options for the Beawar bypass, and also considering the existing by pass on NH-8 and NH-14,
it was agreed that alignment on Shree Cement Roadexcluded from the proposed improvement and
propose new bypass for Beawar on south western side connecting to NH-14 bypass. The new alignment
as discussed and agreed to implement is shown in Figure 7-1.
7.2.2 Geometry in Forest Land
The existing geometry is followed in the stretches where the alignment is passing through forest land.
The design speed is restricted to 40-65 kmph in these stretches. The stretches passing through forest
land is given in Table 7-1.
Table 7-1: Forest Area
Existing Chainage Proposed Chainage

Forest Details Remarks
From To From To
Reserve
MDR-84 (Mandal- Asind Section) 89.100 91.900 40+600 43+000
Forest
7.2.3 Geometric Improvements
The existing carriageway is 3.5-7 m wide, with 1m to 1.2 m wide gravel/earthen shoulders. The
horizontal curves which are deficient either in radius or in transition lengths has been improved to as
per the design standards of National Highways. The vertical curves which are deficient in curve length
and gradients have also been improved. The vertical geometry is also improved at locations of proposed
structures & sections with poor pavement condition. The following Table-7.2 shows the improvements
to existing curves with transitions.
Table 7-2: Proposed Geometric Improvement
SL. No Existing Design Existing Design

Design Speed
Chainage Chainage Radius Radius
1 65500 66000 100 240 80
2 75730 56124 150 360 100

SL. No Existing Design Existing Design

Design Speed
Chainage Chainage Radius Radius
3 86710 45393 50 240 80
7.2.4 List of Existing Deficient Curves
Table 7-3 gives the list of curves having radius less than 240m.
Table 7-3: List of Curves having Radius less than minimum desirable (240 m)
Sl. No HIP Chainage(m) Radius(m) Transition Length(m) Remarks

1. 40594.025 65 15
2. 40763.119 70 15
3. 40821.828 70 15
4. 40876.577 55 25
5. 40943.72 180 0
6. 41001.396 55 15
7. 41065.222 40 15
8. 41130.118 50 15
9. 41208.181 65 15
10. 41286.812 65 15 Forest
11. 41370.731 200 20
12. 41437.195 70 15
13. 41620.011 65 15
14. 41879.269 65 15
15. 42015.196 65 20
16. 42145.885 125 30
17. 42594.599 70 55
18. 42835.861 60 50
19. 42908.118 60 0
20. 73154.851 150 80 Chunginaka
7.2.5 Existing Vs Design Chainages
The statement of tentative existing Vs proposed chainages is given inTable 7-4.
Table 7-4: Tentative Design Chainage vs. Existing Chainage
Sl. No Existing Chainage Design Chainage Remarks

1. 100256 33500
2. 100000 33757
3. 99000 34812
4. 98000 35637 MDR-84
5. 97000 36329
6. 96000 36870
7. 95000 37747

Sl. No Existing Chainage Design Chainage Remarks

8. 94000 38651
9. 93000 39425
10. 92000 40421
11. 91000 41220
12. 90000 42223
13. 89000 43115
14. 88000 44024
15. 87000 44779
16. 86000 46106
17. 85000 47108
18. 84000 48032
19. 83000 48999
20. 82000 49934
21. 81000 50707
22. 80000 51875
23. 79000 52875
24. 78000 53875
25. 77000 54869
26. 76000 55868
27. 75000 56865
28. 74000 57862
29. 73000 58746
30. 72000 59330
31. 71000 60036
32. 70000 61049
33. 69000 62051
34. 68000 63085
35. 67000 64076
36. 66000 65080
37. 65000 66041
38. 64000 67079
39. 63000
40. 60000 68272
41. 59000 68988
42. 58000 69989
43. 57000 70730
44. 56000 71562
45. 55000 72493
46. 54000 73452
7.3 BYPASSES AND REALIGNMENTS

Bypasses have been proposed for various built-up areas along the project highway, where geometric
improvements are not possible as per design standards. The project highway before declaring to
National Highway is comprised with SH-39 and most of the length is MDR-84, and is prevailed with poor
geometrics. Bypasses and realignments are inevitable at many places to improve the geometrics and
mitigating the risks of social impacts. Alternatives alignments for the bypasses have been analyzed using
google maps and toposurvey maps. The list of bypasses and realignment proposed are given in Table 7-
5 and Table 7-6 respectively. The comparative options for the various bypasses are given in subsequent
sections.
Table 7-5: List of Bypasses
Existing Chainage Existing Design Chainage Design Type of

Sl. No. Bypass
Start End Length (m) Start End Length (m) Road
Nil
* The stretch from the existing chainage 60+120 to 63+120 (Parsoli city) is excluded from the Project
Scope. It is under development by NHAI in NH-148D connecting Bhim to Gulabpura.
Table 7-6: List of Realignments
Sl. Existing Chainage Design Chainage Length Village

No From To From To
1 102980 100260 30650 33500 2850 Rajiyawas
2 100062 99583 33775 34254 479
3 99495 99224 34342 34613 271
4 98283 97537 35365 35800 435
5 97292 95672 36045 37100 1055 Pipali Bariya
6 94143 93393 38511 39057 546
7 93316 92921 39134 39500 366
8 89119 88022 43000 44000 1000 Hira Bariya
9 87623 87121 44300 45000 700
10 86381 85592 45740 46514 774
11 85076 83369 47030 48630 1600 Kaniyakhera & Kotra
12 82399 81106 49600 50600 1000 Ojiyana
13 77781 77625 54094 54250 156
14 75468 75128 56400 56740 340
15 74865 74645 57000 57220 220
16 73912 71560 57950 59770 1820 Badnor
17 70358 70067 60710 61000 290
18 66582 66262 64500 64820 320
19 65200 64940 65850 66150 300
20 57969 54827 70020 72625 2605 Asind
Total 17127

The analysis of options for the Rajiyawas built-up area is given Table 7-7 and Figure 7-1
Table 7-7: Analysis of Options for Rajiyawas Realignment
Sl. Description Alternate 1 Alternate 2 (Existing Alternate 3 (Existing

No. (Blue) Alignment) Red Alignment) Magenta
Ex. Km 102/980(MDR- Ex. Km 102/580 (MDR- Ex. Km 102/920(MDR-
1. Start Chainage
84) 84) 84)
2. End Chainage Existing Km 100/260 Existing Km 100/660 Existing Km 100/260
3. Route Alignment LHS of existing road Existing road Existing road
4. Length of bypass 2.850 km 3.620 km 2.860 km
5. Terrain Plain/Rolling Plain/Rolling Plain/Rolling
6. Speed 80-100 Km/hr 50 Km/hr 50 Km/hr
Smooth horizontal and Smooth horizontal and
Smooth horizontal
vertical geometrics is vertical geometrics is
7. Geometrics and vertical
possible with possible with
geometrics is possible
compromised speed compromised speed
Agriculture/Barren/Built Agriculture/Barren/Built
8. Land use Agriculture/Barren
up up
No of Proposed
9. 11 6 culverts
Structures
10. Service Road - Required Required
11. Junctions 4 5 4
12. Land Acquisition 30m 30m 30m
Area Required,
13. 8.55 10.86 5.72
Hectares
Resettlement &
14. Light Impact Moderate Impact Heavy Impact
Rehabilitation
Approx Cost (Crore)
15. 0.269 0.342
LA
Approx highway
16. 9.975 12.670
(Crore) LA
Length is
comparatively less
Future Development
17. Merits is easy
Smooth Geometry is
possible
LAQ requirement is Design speed is less than Design speed is less than
comparatively high minimum (i.e. 40 kmph) minimum (i.e. 40 kmph)
18. Demerits
High R&R issues
19. Recommendation Recommended Not recommended Not recommended

Figure 7-1: Options for Rajiyawas Realignment

The analysis of options for the Pipali Bariya built-up area is given Table 7-8 and Figure 7-2
Table 7-8: Analysis of options for Pipali Bariya Realignment
Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3 (Existing

Sl.No. Description
(Blue) (Red) Alignment) (Magneta)
1. Start Chainage Existing Km 97/292 Ex. Km 98/040 Existing Km 97/140
Existing Km 95/672
2. End Chainage Ex. Km 95/620 Existing Km 96/080
3. Route Alignment RHS LHS Existing road

4. Length 1.055 km 1.901 km 1.654 km
5. Terrain Plain Plain Plain
6. Speed 80-100 Km/hr 80-100 km/hr 30-50 Km/hr
Smooth horizontal Smooth horizontal and
Smooth horizontal and
and vertical vertical geometrics is
7. Geometrics vertical geometrics is
geometrics is possible with
possible
possible compromised speed
8. Land use Agriculture/Barren Agriculture/Barren Built-up
No of Proposed
9. 2 Culverts 4 Culverts -
Structures
10. Service Road - - Required
11. Obligatory Points - -
12. Junctions 1 2 4
Area Required,
14. 3.165 5.703 3.318
Hectares
Resettlement & Heavy Impact due to Built-
15. Light Impact Light Impact
Rehabilitation up area
Approx Cost
16. 0.177 0.319
(Crore) LA
Approx highway
17. 3.693 6.654
(Crore) LA
Passes from Far
away distance to
built up area
Future
18. Merits Future Development is
Development is
easy
easy
Length is comparatively Doesn’t involves
less agricultural land
Length is
comparatively High R&R issues
19. Demerits more
Comparatively High Design speed is less than
Land acquisition minimum (i.e. 40 kmph)

Figure 7-2:: Options for Pipali Bariya Realignment

The analysis of options for the Hiradhani built-up area is given Table 7-9 and Figure 7-3.
Table 7-9: Analysis of Options for Hiradhani Realignment
Sl. Alternate 3 (Existing

Description Alternate 1 (Blue) Alternate 2 (Red)
No. Alignment) (Magneta)
1. Start Chainage Existing Km 89119 Existing Km 89623 Existing Km 89119
2. End Chainage Existing Km 88022 Existing Km 87880 Existing Km 88022
3. Route Alignment LHS of existing road RHS of existing road Existing road
5. Terrain Plain Plain/Rolling Plain
6. Speed 80-100 Km/hr 80-100 Km/hr 50 Km/hr
Smooth horizontal and
Smooth horizontal and Smooth horizontal and
vertical geometrics is
7. Geometrics vertical geometrics is vertical geometrics is
possible with
possible possible
compromised speed
8. Land use Agriculture/Barren Agriculture/Barren Built up
No of Proposed
9. 1 1 MNB, 3 culverts -
Structures
11. Junctions 2 4 1
13. Area Required, Ha 3.00 6.975 2.079
Resettlement & Heavy Impact due to
Rehabilitation Built-up area
Approx Cost
15. 0.216 0.502
(Crore) LA
Future Development is Future Development is
16. Merits easy easy
Smooth Geometry Smooth Geometry
Design speed is less
Length is
17. Demerits than minimum (i.e. 40
comparatively more
kmph)
Passing through
18. High R&R issues
major water bodies
Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd 7-27

Figure 7-3: Options for Hiradhani Realignment

The analysis of options for the Kaniyakhera& Kotra built-up area is given Table 7-10 and Figure 7-4.
Table 7-10: Analysis of Options for Kaniyakhera Kotra Realignment
Alternate 3 (Ex.
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Sl. No. Description Alignment)
(Blue) (Red)
(Magenta)
1. Start Chainage Ex. Km 85/106 Ex. Km 85/120 Existing Km 82/620
2. End Chainage Ex. Km 83/369 Ex. Km 82/620 Existing Km 83/120
3. Route Alignment RHS/LHS LHS Existing road
Smooth horizontal
Smooth horizontal Smooth geometrics
and vertical
7. Geometrics and vertical is possible with
geometrics is
geometrics is possible compromised speed
possible
8. Land use Agriculture/Barren Agriculture/Barren Built up
No of Proposed
9. 1 MNB 1 MNB -
Structures
11. Junctions 4 3 1
Area Required,
13. 4.89 7.155 4.918
(Ha)
Resettlement & Heavy Impact due to
Approx Cost
15. 0.236 0.346
(Crore) LA
Approx highway
16. 5.705 8.348
(Crore) LA
Passes away from Most of alignment Length is
built up area straight in nature comparatively low
Future Development Future Development
17. Merits
is easy is easy
Length is
comparatively short
Length is more High R&R issues
18. Demerits
than minimum (i.e.
40 kmph)

Figure 7-4: Options for Kaniyakhera and Kotra Realignment

The analysis of options for the Ojiyana built-up area is given Table 7-11 and Figure 7-5.
Table 7-11: Analysis of Options for Ojiyana Realignment
Sl. No. Description Alternate 1 (Red) Alternate 2 Alternate 3 (Existing

(Blue) Alignment) (Magenta)
1. Start Chainage Ex. Km 82/399 Ex. Km 82/399 Ex. Km 82/399
2. End Chainage Ex. Km 81/106 Ex. Km 81/106 Ex. Km 81/106
3. Route Alignment LHS of existing road RHS of existing road Existing road
4.
Length of bypass 2.005 km 1.000 km 1.04 km
5. Terrain Plain Rolling Rolling
7. Smooth horizontal Smooth horizontal and Smooth geometrics is
and vertical vertical geometrics is possible with
Geometrics
geometrics is possible compromised speed
possible
8. Existing Land use Agriculture/Barren Agriculture/Barren Built-up
pattern through
proposed alignment
9. No of Proposed
4 culverts 2 -
Structures
11. Junctions 4 2 2
13.
Area Required, (Ha) 6.015 3 2.02
14. Resettlement & Heavy Impact due to
Light Impact Light Impact
15. Approx Cost (Crore)
0.680 0.399
LA
16. Approx highway
7.018 3.5
(Crore) LA
17. Merits Passes away from Passes away from built
built up area up area
Future Future Development is
Development is easy
easy
Length is Passes through Design speed is less
Demerits comparatively rolling terrain than minimum (i.e. 40
more kmph)
18. Recommendation Not Recommended Recommended Not recommended

Figure 7-5: Options for Ojiyana Realignment

The analysis of options for the Badnor built-up area is given Table 7-12 and Figure 7-6.
Table 7-12: Analysis of Options for Badnor Realignment
Sl. Description Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3 (Existing

No. (Blue) (Red) Alignment)
(Magenta)
1. Start Chainage Existing Km 73/912 Existing Km 73/912 Existing Km 73/912
3. Route Alignment LHS/RHS LHS Existing road
Smooth horizontal Smooth horizontal Smooth horizontal and
and vertical and vertical vertical geometrics is
7. Geometrics
geometrics is geometrics is possible with
possible possible compromised speed
Existing Land use Agriculture/Barren Agriculture/Barren Built up
8. pattern through
proposed alignment
No of Proposed 5 culverts 4 Culverts -
9.
Structures
10. Service Road Required - Required
11. Junctions 4 4 4
13.
Area Required, (Ha) 7.188 5.46 6.65
Approx Cost (Crore)
14. 2.694 2.047
LA
Approx highway
15. 8.386 6.370
(Crore) LA
Resettlement & Heavy Impact due to Built-
16. Moderate Impact Light Impact
Rehabilitation up area
17. Approx Cost (Crore) 8.23 11.32
Passes from far away
Smooth Geometry distance to built-up
area.
18. Merits Future Development
is easy.
Smooth Geometry
Involve
Involve R&R issues agriculture/Barren High R&R issues.
19. Demerits land acquisition.
Design speed is less than
minimum (i.e. 40 kmph)
20. Recommendation Not Recommended Recommended Not recommended

Figure 7-6: Options for Badnor Realignment

The analysis of options for the Asind built-up area is given Table 7-13 and Figure 7-7.
Table 7-13: Analysis of options for Asind Realignment
Sl. Description Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3 (Existing

No. (Blue) (Red) Alignment)(Magenta)
1. Start Chainage Existing Km 57/969 Existing Km 58/140 Existing Km 57/969
3. Route Alignment LHS of existing road LHS of existing road Existing road
5. Length of existing 1.974 3.278 km
alignment Bypassed
7. Speed 80-100 Km/hr 80-100 Km/hr 30-50 Km/hr
8. Smooth horizontal and Smooth horizontal Smooth horizontal and
vertical geometrics is and vertical vertical geometrics is
Geometrics
possible geometrics is possible with
possible compromised speed
9. Existing Land use Agriculture/Barren Agriculture/Barren Residential,
pattern through Commercial
proposed alignment
10. No of Proposed
1 MJB 1 MJB 1 MJB
Structures
11. Service Road Required - Required
12. Junctions 6 5 6
14. Area Required (Ha) 6.315 8.295 3.948
15. Resettlement & Light Impact Light Impact Heavy Impact due to
16. Approx LA Cost (Cr) 4.153 5.456
17. Approx highway (Cr) 7.368 9.678
Length is comparatively
shorter than alternative
18. Merits 2&3
Uses existing alignment
Length is High R&R issues
19. Demerits comparatively higher
than alternative 1
than minimum (i.e. 40
kmph)

Figure 7-7: Options for Asind Realignment
7.4 BUILT-UP SECTIONS
Built-up sections are proposed with 2.5m wide paved shoulders, along with foot path cum drains on
both sides. Table 7-14 gives the list built-up sections.
Table 7-14: Built-up Sections
Sl.
Existing Chainage (m) Design Chainage (m) Design Length (m)
No.
1 95447 95147 37300 37600 300
2 92775 92525 39650 39900 250
3 86506 86256 45600 45850 250
4 70449 70049 60600 61000 400
5 59169 57989 68820 69500 680
7.5 RIGHT OF WAY
The existing ROW varies from 15-30m. Additional ROW as required is proposed for the curve
improvements and realignments as shown in drawings. ROW of 30 m is proposed for the major
realignments and bypasses respectively. Additional ROW is proposed for the three toll plazas, Bus Bay,

Truck Lay bye and wayside amenities as per Manual of Specifications and Standards. The proposed ROW
of the project length is 30 m except the locations that are given in Table 7-15.
Table 7-15: Proposed RoW
Design Chainage Proposed Row

Sl. No Length (m) Remarks
From To LHS RHS
1 39300 39650 350 22 22 Toll Plaza-2
2 60880 61120 240 25 15 Truck Lay bye
3 67300 67500 200 15 100 Way Side Amenities
Note: i) Unless otherwise specified, ROW of 30m is proposed for locations other than above.
ii)The land acquisition plan is under progress. The existing and proposed ROW details will be
submitted with report on Land Acquisition and Utility Shifting.
7.6 INTERSECTIONS / JUNCTIONS IMPROVEMENT
Table 7-16 and Table 7-17 shows list of major and minor intersections / junctions proposed for
improvement respectively.
Table 7-16: List of Major Junctions
Design
Existing Type of Leads to Leads to
Sl. No. Chainage Remarks
Chainage (km) Junction Left Right
(km)
1 103/100 30800 T - Rajiyawas Rajiyawas Realignment Start
2 Realignment 33433 T - Rajiyawas Rajiyawas Realignment End
3 Realignment 43238 T - Hirabariya Hira Bariya Realignment Start
4 Realignment 43865 T - Hirabariya Hira Bariya Realignment End
5 Realignment 47158 T - Kaniyakhera Kaniyakhera Realignment Start
6 Realignment 47900 T - Kotra Kaniyakhera Realignment end
7 Realignment 49770 T Ojiyana - Ojiyana Realignment Start
8 Realignment 50426 T Ojiyana - Ojiyana Realignment End
9 Realignment 58670 T - Badnor Badnor Realignment Start
10 Realignment 59670 T - Badnor Badnor Realignment End
11 Realignment 67950 + NH 148-D
12 Realignment 67950 T NH 148-D
13 Realignment 70225 T Asind RHS
14 Realignment 72532 T Asind RHS
Table 7-17: List of Minor Junctions
Sl. No. Design Type Of LHS Lead to RHS Leads to Direction

1 Chainage
31660 Junction
T Gohana LHS
2 32325 T Gohana LHS
3 32735 T Gohana LHS
4 32900 Y Rajiyawas RHS
5 34360 + Rayta Khera Rajiyawas Both


6 Chainage
34917 Junction
T Shahpura RHS
7 35277 + Shahpura Shahpura Both
8 36021 T Suradiya RHS
9 36230 Y Peepli Ka Wadiya LHS
10 36530 Y Peepli Ka Wadiya LHS
11 36790 T Suradiya RHS
12 38331 T Patta Khera RHS
13 39048 T Akhegarh RHS
14 40400 T Shekhawas LHS
15 42615 T Shekhawas LHS
16 44740 T Chatarpura LHS
17 45000 T Bar RHS
18 45100 T Chatarpura LHS
19 45740 T Bar RHS
20 45815 + Amarpura Amarpura Both
21 46485 + Amarpura Amarpura Both
22 48258 T Bhairoopura LHS
23 48550 T Bhairoopura LHS
24 49235 T Laxmipura at Kotra LHS
25 52460 + Mothi Singhpura BOTH
26 54159 T Bichchhu Dara LHS
27 55755 T Mogar RHS
28 56400 T Akarsada LHS
29 58800 + Jaisinghpura Badnor Both
30 60789 Y Badhor RHS
31 61476 T Kolpura RHS
32 62620 T Jhadoo Ka Khera RHS
33 62875 T Badhor LHS
34 63965 T Gayatri Nagar LHS
35 66545 + Pura Bajunda Both
36 68798 T Ajeetpura RHS
37 68888 T Pratappura LHS
42 70870 T Asind RHS
43 70980 T Asind LHS
45 71185 + Asind Asind Both
48 71540 + Asind Asind Both
49 71830 + Keriya Khera Asind Both
50 73002 T Chunginaka LHS
51 73175 T Chunginaka LHS
52 73300 + Chunginaka Chunginaka Both


53 Chainage
73445 Junction
T Chunginaka LHS
7.7 GRADE SEPARATED STRUCTURES
The grade separated structures are proposed at the locations given in Table 7-18 and Table 7-19
Table 7-18 : Proposed Vehicular Underpass
Design Improvement Proposal Width

Sl.
Chainage Span Vertical
No Proposal Type
(Km) arrangement (m) clearance (m)
Nil
Table 7-19 : Proposed Vehicular Underpass Grade II
Design
Sl. Span Vertical
Chainage Width
No Proposal Type arrangement clearance
(Km)
(m) (m)
1. 60+810 New construction RCC Box 1x12 4 13
7.8 PEDESRTIAN SUBWAY
The pedestrian subway are proposed at the locations given in Table 7-21.
Table 7-20: Proposed Pedestrian Subway
Design
Vertical Width
Sl. No Chainage Span
Proposal Type clearance (m)
(Km) arrangement (m)
(m)
1 35+360 New Construction RCC Box 1x4.8 2.75 14
7.9 WAYSIDE AMENITIES PROPOSED
The wayside amenities are proposed at the locations given in Table 7-22.
Table 7-22: Location of wayside Amenities
Sl. No. Existing Chainage (km) Design Chainage (km) Side Section
1 63/380 (MDR-84) 67+400 LHS Beawar-Mandal
7.10 BUSBAYS AND BUS SHELTER
Bus Shelters with and without Bus bays are proposed at the locations given in Table 7-26.

Table 7-23: List of Proposed Bus bay
Design Chainage Remarks Design Chainage Remarks

Left Right
36650 36275 Shelter Only
40330 38960
44650 Shelter Only 42600 Shelter Only
45780 Shelter Only 44800 Shelter Only
62805 48100
63950 48750 Shelter Only
66460 52200
68925 54050
56300
61050
66750
68200
7.11 TRUCK LAY BYS
Truck Lay bays are proposed at the locations given in Table below.
Table 7-24: List of Proposed Truck Lay bay
Sr no Design Chainage Side

1 61+920 LHS
7.12 TOLL PLAZA
Toll plazas are proposed at following locations.
Table 7-25: Toll plaza location
Applicable
Sl. No. Location Tollable section Remark (Traffic Adopted)
Length (km)
Toll plaza 2 km 30.050 to km
1 43.950 km 82.000 of MDR-84
(Km 39.475) 74.000

8 PAVEMENT DESIGN
8.1 GENERAL
The existing pavement along the project is flexible in nature except few sections with rigid pavement.
The project envisages widening to two lanes with paved shoulder/ 4 lane of the carriageway for
augmenting the capacity of the project road and significantly extending its service life. Pavement design
includes strengthening of existing pavement, Reconstruction, New construction, Overlay and new
design for widening.
The general procedure for design of the flexible pavement and rigid pavement for widened portion as
new construction as well as strengthening of existing carriageway has been followed as per the
guidelines of IRC: 37-2018 and IRC 58-2015– “Guidelines for the design of flexible pavements” and
“Guidelines for the design of Rigid pavements” and IRC: 81-1997- “Guidelines for Strengthening of
flexible road pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique”.
Based on the evaluation of the functional and structural properties of the existing pavement, subgrade
strength, axle loads and design traffic, the pavement design can be divided into two parts:
1. Design of the new pavement

2. Design of the overlay for existing pavement
New pavement design is based on the design traffic (MSA) and the subgrade strength, however the
overlay design will vary for each homogenous sections based on its structural and functional adequacy
as well as base and sub base thicknesses.
The pavement proposal (Widening/Reconstruction/Overlay/Raising) has been finalized in consultation

with PWD and same has been proposed below.
The following IRC codes are considered for the pavement design;
 IRC: 37 – 2018, “Guidelines for the Design of Flexible Pavements”

 IRC: 81–1997, “Guidelines for Strengthening of Flexible Pavements using
Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique”
 IRC: 58 – 2015, “Guidelines for the Design of Plain Jointed Rigid Pavements for
Highways”.
The typical layer combinations considered for flexible pavement and rigid pavement are shown in
Figure-8.1 and Figure 8.2.
Figure 8-1:: Typical Layer Combination for Flexible Pavement with Granular Base and Granular Sub-
base

Figure 8-2: Typical Layer Combination for Rigid Pavement
8.2 PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS
The following design parameters have been considered for the flexible and rigid pavement.
8.2.1 Design Life
Pavement design life is the period for which the initial design of pavement crust layers shall be carried
out. Design life should not be referred as terminal stage of crust beyond which crust becomes unusable.
Design life of 15 years has been considered for flexible pavement design.
The Rigid pavement design has been carried out in accordance with IRC: 58-2015. As per clause 5.4 of
IRC: 58-2015 a design life of 30 years has been considered for rigid pavement design.
8.2.2 Traffic Homogenous Sections
Based on the detailed reconnaissance of the project road for traffic intensity and composition, the
project road is divided as four traffic homogeneous sections. The details of proposed traffic
homogeneous sections are given in Table 8-1.
Figure 8-3: Traffic Homogenous Sections
Traffic Design Chainage (Km) Existing Chainage (Km) Proposed as

Existing Road
Homogenous per traffic
Section
Section From To From To survey
80.00 82.00 SH-39 2-lane with
HS-II 30.00 74.00
103.64 54.448 MDR-84 paved shoulder

8.2.3 Design Traffic Loading (MSA)
Base year traffic in terms of AADT, design period, traffic growth rates, vehicle damage factors (VDFs)
and lane distribution factors (LDFs) are required to estimate the design traffic loading in terms of
equivalent standard axles.
8.2.4 Base Year Traffic
The base year traffic has been assessed by carrying out traffic surveys. The detailed traffic surveys and
analysis for the project road have been given in separate chapter-4. For pavement design purpose,
commercial vehicles of laden weight more than 3 tones have been considered. Such vehicles consisted
of buses, LCVs, 2 Axle trucks, 3 Axle trucks and Multi Axle trucks. The summary of AADT of commercial
vehicles considered for pavement design is given in Table 8-2.
Table 8-1: Summary of Commercial Vehicles (AADT)
Mode Section 30.000 to 74.000

BUS 77
LCV 46
2A 94
3A 123
MAV 284
Total 624
8.2.5 Traffic Growth Rates
Traffic growth rates have been estimated based on elasticity method, but where the growth rate below
5% is estimate based on elasticity method shall be consider as 5% for MSA calculation as per IRC 37-
2012 and IRC 58-2015.Summary of obtained growth rates are given in Table 8-3. The detailed traffic
growth calculations have been given in Traffic chapter-4.
Table 8-2: Summary of Proposed Traffic Growth Rates
Vehicle Type 2020-24 2025-29 2030-34 2035-39 2040-44 > 2044
Buses 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00

LCV 5.97 6.33 6.00 5.62 5.08 5.00
2-Axle Trucks 5.28 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3-Axle Trucks 5.42 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
MAV 6.23 5.98 5.67 5.30 5.00 5.00
8.2.6 Vehicle Damage Factors (VDFs)
The vehicle damage factor (VDF) is a multiplier to convert the number of commercial vehicles of
different axle loads and axle configuration to the number of standard axle load repetitions. It is defined
as the equivalent number of standard axles per commercial vehicle. Universally accepted standard axle

load weighs 8,160 Kg. ESAL is determined by the relationships recommended in IRC: 37-2018 ‘Tentative
guidelines for the design of Flexible Pavements’. An excerpt is presented here.
Single axle with single wheel on either side : Equivalency Factor = (Axle load in tones /6.6)4
Single axle with dual wheels on either side : Equivalency Factor = (Axle load in tones /8.16)4
Tandem axle with dual wheels on either side : Equivalency Factor = (Axle load in tones /15.10)4
Tridem axles with dual wheels on either side: Equivalency Factor = (Axle load in tones /22.85)4
The relationship is referred to as the ‘Fourth Power Rule’, which states that the damaging effect of an
axle load increases as the fourth power of the weight of an axle. In order to convert axle loads from the
survey data into ESAL, each axle of each category of vehicle is multiplied by the equivalency factor of
that type of axle. The output is called the ‘damage’ caused by that particular axle on the pavement.
Damages by all axles are then added to find the cumulative damage by that type of vehicle. The
cumulative damage is divided by the number of vehicles of that category surveyed to obtain the
average damage, which is also called the Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF) of that category of vehicle.
Cumulative Damage
VDF =
Sample Size
Axle load surveys have been conducted at two locations, to ascertain Vehicle Damage factors (VDF)
values along the existing project road at km 147+000 of existing SH-39 and km 37+000 of MDR-84. The
VDF values arrived from the analysis given in Table 8.4. The detailed axle survey data with analysis is
given in Annexure 8-1 and Annexure 8-2 of Volume-1A.
Table 8-3: Summary of Adopted Vehicle Damage Factors (VDFs)
Vehicle Type HS-II

LCV 0.78
Bus 1.95
2-Axle 6.03
3-Axle 11.59
MAV 12.08
8.2.7 Lane Distribution Factors
Lane distribution factors have been considered as per clause 4.5.1 of IRC: 37-2018 and the same are
given in Table 8-5.
Table 8-4: Adopted Lane Distribution Factors (LDFs)
Design Period
Sl. No Description LDF Considered (%)
From (Year) To (Year)
50% of number of commercial
1 Two Lane Single Carriageway Roads 2021 2036
vehicles in Both direction
75% of number of commercial
2 4 Lane Dual Carriageway Roads 2021 2036
vehicles in each direction
8.2.8 Traffic Loading (Cumulative Million Standard Axles)
Design traffic loading in million standard axles (MSA) has been estimated for design life of 15 years
(post construction).

The design traffic is considered in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles to be carried
during the design life of the road. This can be computed using the following equation:
N = 365*[(1+r)n-1]*A*D*F
r
Where,
N = Cumulative number of standard axles to be catered for in the design
In terms of MSA
A = Initial traffic in the years of completion of construction in terms
of the number of commercial vehicles per day.
D = Lane distribution factor
F = Vehicle Damage Factor
n = Design life in years
r = Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles
The traffic in the year of completion is estimated using the following formula:
A=P (1+r/100)x
Where,
P = Number of commercial vehicles as per count

x = Number of years between the count and the year of completion
of construction.
The summary of obtained and adopted MSA is given in Table 8.6 and graphically shown as.The detailed
MSA calculations are given as Annexure 8-3.
Table 8-5: Obtained and Adopted MSA for the Project Road
Homogenous Sections Section MSA Obtained MSA Adopted

II 2-lane with paved shoulder 29.13 30

the state of Rajasthan Preliminary Design Report
8.3 PAVEMENT COMPOSITION/SOIL INVESTIGATIONS
Table 8-6: Test Results of Trial Pits
Design Wearing Base Sub-Base Subgrade Total

Sl. Road Moisture
Chainage Side Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness
No Section Type Type Type Type Content
(Km) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
1 31+000 MDR-84 LHS BT 70 WMM 150 - - - 220 6
2 37+000 MDR-84 RHS BT 80 WMM 140 - Gravelly Soil 200 420 5
3 43+000 MDR-84 LHS BT 60 WBM 250 - - - 310 5
4 45+000 MDR-84 RHS BT 80 WMM 150 GSB 300 - - 530 6.5
5 50+000 MDR-84 LHS BT 80 WMM 200 - Gravelly Soil 150 430 3.5
6 51+000 MDR-84 RHS BT 60 WMM 160 GSB 110 - - 330 -
7 53+000 MDR-84 RHS BT 100 WMM 200 - - - 300 4
8 60+000 MDR-84 LHS BT 60 WBM Boulder 180 Gravelly Soil 100 340 4.5
9 64+000 MDR-84 RHS BT 70 WMM 100 - Gravelly Soil 200 370 5
10 69+900 MDR-84 LHS BT 80 WMM 200 - - - 280 3.5
As above Table 8-7 shows that on project stretch Sub base and base thicknesses during trail pit is not adequate as per national highway specification and
IRC 37-2018. Overlay can’t be done with insufficient base and sub base thicknesses and strength. Hence reconstruction has been done on Subgrade
onwards (laying New GSB layer).
Table 8-7: Laboratory Test Results of Sub grade Soil Samples
CBR Value
Maximum Optimum (%)
Sr. Gravel Silt (%) IS Dry Moisture
Location Sand (%) Clay (%) Liquid Plastic
No. (%) 0.075- Plasticity Classification Density Content
4.75–0.075 Less Than Limit Limit Soaked
Up to 0.002 Index (%) (G/Cc) (%)
mm 0.002 mm (%) (%)
4.75 mm mm
1 31+000 NH-158 5 55 --40-- - NP - SM 1.92 7.2 6.2
2 37+000 NH-158 6 50 --44-- - NP - SM 1.9 7.4 6.8

the state of Rajasthan Preliminary Design Report
CBR Value
Maximum Optimum (%)
Sr. Gravel Silt (%) IS Dry Moisture
Location Sand (%) Clay (%) Liquid Plastic
No. (%) 0.075- Plasticity Classification Density Content
4.75–0.075 Less Than Limit Limit Soaked
Up to 0.002 Index (%) (G/Cc) (%)
mm 0.002 mm (%) (%)
4.75 mm mm
3 43+000 NH-158 7 53 --40-- - NP - SM 1.95 7.42 7.1
4 45+000 NH-158 10 65 --25-- - NP - SM 1.96 6.98 7.6
5 50+000 NH-158 10 42 --48-- - NP - SM 1.96 7 6.7
6 53+000 NH-158 12 63 --25-- - NP - SM 1.99 7.74 7.2
7 60+000 NH-158 12 60 --28-- - NP - SM 1.97 7.55 7.5
8 64+000 NH-158 6 54 --40-- - NP - SM 1.92 8.2 8.2
9 69+900 NH-158 5 60 --35-- - NP - SM 1.89 9.1 6.1
As per above Table 8-8, it is observed that the majority of existing subgrade soils are acceptable as they fulfill the physical requirements of MORTH
specifications clause 305.2.1.

Figure 8-4: Subgrade CBR Value
From Above figure 8-4 Subgrade 90th percentile CBR value is 6.2 %,
As above Table 8-7 From the trial-pit investigation and subgrade test results presented in Table 8-8, it is
observed that the majority of existing subgrade soils are acceptable as they fulfill the physical
requirements of MORTH specifications clause 305.2.1 hence For design CBR is consider as 6.2% whereas
per IRC 37-2018 clause 6.4.3 the select forming the subgrade should have a more than CBR of 5%. For
considering the environment and costing purpose effective minimum subgrade 500mm CBR is 7% is
consider. Hence where subgrade CBR is more than or equal to 7% for reconstruction will start from GSB
layer where reconstruction is proposed. Borrow area CBR for construction of subgrade is calculate as
per clause 5.2 in IRC 37-2018,which is more than or equal to 8%, hence any location of Borrow area
given in Table 8-9 is used in bypass/realignment preparation.

Table 8-8: Laboratory Test Results of Bypass Soil Samples
CBR
Mechanical Properties Atterberg'S Limits
Maximu Optimum Value (%)
IS
Sr. m Dry Moisture
Location Gravel Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) Liquid Plastic Plasticit Classificati
No. Density Content
(%) Up to 4.75– 0.075- Less Than Limit Limit y Index on Soaked
(G/Cc) (%)
4.75 mm 0.075 mm 0.002 mm 0.002 mm (%) (%) (%)
1 Kaniya Khera Kotra Realignment 6 34 --60-- 34 20 14 CL 1.84 11.80 5.6
2 Badnor Realignment 0 68 --32-- - NP - SM 1.92 8.25 5.9
3 Haripura Realignment 9 63 --28-- - NP - SM 1.91 7.45 7.9
4 Asind Realignment 0 60 --40-- - NP - SM 1.90 7.50 6.1
5 Pipal Bariya Realignment 5 37 --58-- 34 19 15 CL 1.84 10.90 5.4
6 Roopnagar Realignment 15 40 --45-- 33 20 13 SC 1.96 8.10 8.2
7 Rajiyawas Realignment 2 60 --38-- 34 22 12 SC 1.87 8.40 6.0
8 Hiradhani Realignment 6 45 --49-- 31 20 11 SC 1.86 8.60 6.5
9 Bherikhera Realignment 8 50 --42-- 33 23 10 SC 1.88 8.30 6.8
10 Ojiyana Realignment 0 62 --35-- - NP - SM 1.84 7.50 6.3

Figure 8-5: Bypass/Realignment Soil CBR Value
From Above figure 8-5 OGL at Bypass/Realignment 90th percentile CBR value is 5.6 %, for 90th
percentile design CBR is consider as 5.6% whereas per IRC 37-2012 clause 5.1 the select forming the
subgrade should have a minimum CBR of 8%. For considering the environment and costing purpose
effective minimum subgrade 500mm CBR is 7% is consider because the homogeneity in Subgrade CBR in
Bypass/Realignment and existing Road. Hence Borrow material has been use for Subgrade preparation,
Borrow area CBR range was calculate as IRC 37-2018 is more than or equal to 5%, Any location of
Borrow area given in Table 8-9 is used in bypass/realignment preparation.
Table 8-9: Laboratory Test Results of Borrow Soil Samples
CBR
Mechanical Properties Atterberg's Limits Value
Maxi Optim
(%)
Locatio mum um
Silt Clay IS
Sr. n Road Grav Sand Dry Moist
(%) (%) Plast Plasti Classific
No. Chaina Section el (%) (%) Liquid Densit ure
0.075 Less ic city ation
ge Km Up to 4.75– Limit y Conte Soaked
- Than Limi Index
4.75 0.075 (%) (G/cc) nt (%)
0.002 0.002 t (%) (%)
mm mm
mm mm
1 68+500 MDR-84 0.00 69.60 30.40 21 NP NP SM 2.079 6.80 11.30
2 70+200 MDR-84 42.00 48.00 10.00 - NP NP SM 2.05 8.20 9.10
Above Table 8-10 test results indicate that the soils in the potential borrow areas fall in SM classes. Their
CBR values ranges from 8.20 to 11.3. Pavement design shall be based on 90th percentile CBR value 8.5%.
Effective Design CBR

Table 8-10: Adopted Effective CBR in Design calculation
90th Percentile Borrow Soil CBR (%) More than or equal to 8%

Effective Design CBR (%) 6% & 7.0%
th
90 percentile Embankment CBR or Bypass/realignment
5.6%
below 500mm subgrade CBR (%) equal or more than
8.4 PAVEMENT DESIGN FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION / WIDENING / RECONSTRUCTION
8.4.1 Design Approach
Pavement Model: Flexible pavement is modeled as an elastic multilayer structure. Stresses and strains
at critical locations are computed using a linear layered elastic model. The stress analysis software
IITPAVE has been used for computation of stresses and strains in flexible pavements. Tensile strain, εt,
at the bottom of the bituminous layer and the vertical sub-grade strain εv, on the top of the sub-grade
are conventionally considered as critical parameters for pavement design to limit cracking and rutting in
the bituminous layers and non-bituminous layers respectively. The different stresses and strains in a
flexible pavement are shown in Figure-8.6.
Figure 8-6: Stresses and Strains of a Flexible Pavement
The IRC method for pavement design is based on limiting the vertical compressive strain on top of sub-
grade which results in permanent deformation of the pavement and the horizontal tensile strain at the
bottom of the bituminous layer which results in cracking of the pavement. The relationships governing
the above two pavement failure criteria are expressed as:
Fatigue Model: With every load repetition, the tensile strain developed at the bottom of the bituminous
layer develops micro cracks, which go on widening and expanding till the load repetitions are large
enough for the cracks to propagate to the surface over an area of the surface that is unacceptable from
the point of view of long term serviceability of the pavement. The phenomenon is called fatigue of the
bituminous layer and the number of load repetitions in terms of standard axles that cause fatigue

denotes the fatigue life of the pavement. Cracking in 20% area has been considered for traffic up to 30
MSA and 10% for traffic beyond that.
Nf = 1.6064 X C x 10-4 (1/εt) 3.89 * (1/MR) 0.854 (80% Reliability)
Nf = 0.5161 X C x 10-4 (1/εt) 3.89 * (1/MR) 0.854 (90% Reliability
Where,
Nf = Fatigue life in number of standard axles
εt = Maximum tensile strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer,
and
MR = Resilient modulus of the bituminous layer
The mixes used in the pavement under study sections were generally designed for 3.5% air voids and
bitumen content of 4.5% by weight of the mix (which in terms of volume would come to 11.5%). Hence
introduced the C factor in fatigue models to take into account the effect of air voids (Va) and volume of
effective bitumen (Vbe), which is given by the following relationships,
C = 10M, and M=4.84(Vbe/ (Va+Vbe)-0.69)
Va = percent volume of air voidin themix used in the bottombituminous layer;

Vbe = percent volume of effective bitumenin the mix used in thebottombituminous layer;
Nf =fatigue life of bituminous layer(cumulative equivalent number of 80kN standard
Axle loads that can be served by the pavement before the critical cracked area of 20
% or more of paved surface area occurs)
Et =maximum horizontal tensile strain at the bottom of the bottom bituminous layer
(DBM)calculated using line are elastic layered the or by applying standard axle load at
the surface of the selected pavement system
MR =resilient modulus(MPa)of the bituminous mix used in the bottom bituminous layer,
selected as per the recommendations made in these guidelines.
Thefactor ‘C’ is anadjustment factor used to account for the effect of variation in the mix volumetric
parameters (effective binder volume and airvoid content)on the fatigue life of bituminous mixes was
incorporated in the fatigue models to integrate the mix design considerations in thefatigue performance
model.
A popular approach used for enhancing the fatigue life of bituminous layers is to make the bottom most
bituminous mixes richer in bitumen. Larger binder volume in the mix means an increased thickness of
the binder film in the mix and an increase in the proportion of bitumen over anycross- section of
thelayernormaltothedirectionof tensilestrain.Besideshavinglongerfatiguelives, largerbindervolumeswill
also be making the mix more moisture damage resistant due to thicker binder films which also reduce
the aging of the binder.Considering that thebottom bituminous layer will be subjected to significantly
lower stresses and lower summer temperatures compared to the upper layers, the chance of rutting of
the lower layer willbe less.

Rutting Model: Rutting model also has been calibrated in the the pavement performance data ,
model considers the vertical strain in sub-grade as the only variable for rutting, which is a measure of
bearing capacity of the sub-grade.
80% reliability
N = 4.1656 x 10-8 (1/εv) 4.5337
90% reliability
N = 1.41 x 10-8 (1/εv) 4.5337
Where,
N - Number of cumulative standard axles, and
εv - Vertical strain in the sub-grade
As can be seen, the model considers the vertical strain in subgrade as the only variable for rutting, which
is a measure of bearing capacity of the subgrade. Rutting in granular layer also is lower when the
vertical subgrade elastic strains are given by above equation. Also is lower when the vertical subgrade
elastic strains are given by Equations. A granular layer founded on a strong subgrade has a high resilient
modulus and resists rutting when not highly stressed. Rutting in the bituminous layers also occurs due
to the secondary compaction and shear deformation apart from that in the subgrade. This needs to be
addressed. The recommendation in these guidelines is to provide rut resistant bituminous mixes using
higher viscosity grade bitumen or modified bitumen.
Fatigue cracking in Cementinious layer
In these guidelines, the treatment of fatigue cracking of cement treated layers is recommended at two
levels. Thickness of the cemented layer is firstly evaluated from fatigue consideration in terms of
cumulative standard axles. At the second level, the cumulative fatigue damage due to individual axles is
calculated based on a model which uses 'stress ratio' (the ratio of actual stresses developed due to a
class of wheel load and the flexural strength of the material) as the parameter. The computation of
stresses due to the individual wheel load is done by the IITPAVE program. An excel sheet can be used to
calculate the cumulative fatigue damage of each class of wheel loads and sum up the cumulative
damage for the entire axle load spectrum. The design requirement is that the cumulative damage of all
wheel loads should be less than 1 during the design life of a pavement. If it is greater than 1, the section
has to be changed and iteration done again. The first model is taken from the Australian experience,
while the second one is suggested in MEPDG. The second level analysis is necessary only when very
heavy traffic is operating on the highways. The two fatigue equations are given below
Fatigue life in terms of Standard Axle
113000 12
E0.804
+ 191)
𝑁=[ ]
et
RF = Reliability factor for Cementinious materials for failure against fatigue.

= 1 for Expressways, National Highways and other heavy volume roads.

= 2 for others carrying less than 1500 trucks per day. N = Fatigue life of the Cementitious
material.
E=Elastic modulus of Cementitious material.
et= tensile strain in the Cementinious layer, micro strain.
8.4.2 Granular Base & Granular Sub-Base (Option – I )
The type and pavement structural layers proposed are Granular Sub base (GSB), Wet Mix Macadam
(WMM), Bituminous Surfacing comprising Dense Bituminous Macadam (DBM-2) and Bituminous
Concrete (BC-2).
Granular sub-base layer

Sub-base materials may consist of natural sand, moorum, gravel, laterite, kankar, brick metal,
crushed stone, crushed slag, reclaimed crushed concrete/reclaimed asphalt pavement, river bed
material or combinations thereof meeting the prescribed grading and physical requirements. When
the granular sub-base material consists of a combination of different materials, mixing should be done
mechanically by either using a suitable mixer or adopting the mix-in-place method. Granular sub-base
(GSB) should conform to the MORTH Specifications for Road and Bridge Works.
If the thickness of the sub-base layer provided in the design permits, the sub-base layer shall have two
sub layers; drainage layer and the filter layer. The upper layer of the sub-base functions as a drainage
layer to drain away the water that enters through surface cracks. The lower layer of the sub-base
should function as the filter/separation layer to prevent intrusion of subgrade soil into the pavement.
The aggregate gradations recommended for the drainage layer are granular sub-base gradations III
and IV of MoRTH specifications. The gradations I, II, V and VI specified for GSB by MoRTH are
recommended for filter/separation layer.
If the design thickness of the granular sub-base is less than or equal to 200 mm, both drainage and
filter layers cannot be provided separately. For such cases, a single drainage-cum-filter layer with GSB
gradation V or VI of MoRTH specifications may be provided.
When GSB layer is also provided below the median in continuation with that of the pavement, a non-
woven geo-synthetic may be provided over the GSB in the median part so that the fines percolating
through the median do not enter into the GSB and choke it.
Base Layer
The base layer consists of wet mix macadam, water bound macadam, crusher run macadam, reclaimed
concrete, etc., conforming to MoRTH specifications. Wet mix macadam may also consist of blast
furnace slag mixed with crushed stone meeting the MoRTH specifications. The thickness of the
unbound granular layer shall not be less than 150 mm except for the crack relief layer placed over
cement treated base for which the thickness shall be 100 mm.
When both sub-base and the base layers are made up of unbound granular layers, the composite
resilient modulus of the granular base can be estimated using equation given in IRC 37-2018 as the
modulus of the combined (GSB + Granular base) granular layer in MPa, ‘h’ as the combined
thickness (mm) of the granular sub-base and base and using the effective modulus (MPa) of the
subgrade.

For the granular base placed on CTSB layer, the resilient modulus may be taken as 300 MPa and 350
MPa for natural gravel and crushed rock respectively. Poisson’s ratio of granular bases and sub-bases
may be taken as 0.35.
Figure 8-7: Bituminous Surfacing with Wet Mix Macadam Base & Granular Sub-Base
The IITPAVE software was used for this design. The allowable strains in the pavement layers have been
calculated in terms of two primary pavement failure modes: fatigue cracking and rutting. The actual
strains arising in the pavement layers due to traffic loading have been calculated, assuming suitable
thickness values for different pavement layers. The assumed pavement crust is deemed to be safe for
the design loads, if obtained strains are lesser than the allowable strains.
Allowable strains as per IRC: 37- 2018 fatigue and rutting criteria are shown in the Table 8.12 for
different traffic loading (MSA).
Table 8-11: Allowable tensile and compressive strain
Adopted Modulus of
HS Adopted MSA
resilience (Mpa)
Bitumen For For Base & Et Ev
Effective
Bituminous Sub-base BT B+SB SUBGRADE
CBR 6%
Layers Layers
HS-II VG-40 30 30 3000 173 55 203.0E-06 416.0E-06
8.4.3 Cemented Base and Cemented Sub-Base With Sami At Interface Of Cemented Base And
Bituminous Layer (Option – II )

The type and pavement structural layers proposed are Cementinious base (CTB), Aggregate interlayer,
Bituminous Surfacing comprising Dense Bituminous Macadam (DBM-2) and Bituminous Concrete (BC-2).
Cemented sub base

The material used for cementitious (cement treated) sub-base may consist of soil, river bed materials,
natural gravel aggregates, recycled concrete aggregates, crushed aggregates or soil aggregate mixture
modified with different cementitious materials such as cement, lime, lime- flyash, commercially
available stabilizers, etc. The recommended aggregate gradation for the CTSB material is Grading IV of
Table 400-1 of MoRTH specifications.
The terms, ‘cementitious’ and ‘cement treated’, are used interchangeably in these guidelines. If the
CTSB material, which typically is a coarse/open graded material, is disturbed and shows signs of
instability, the same may be restored by treating it with cement or bitumen emulsion. If soil stabilized
with cementitious material is used as a sub-base, commercially available geo-composites can be used to
serve as drainage cum filter/separation layer.
The recommended minimum thickness for CTSB layer is 200 mm.
For typical cement treated granular sub-base materials, the ECGSB can vary from 2000 to 6000 MPa.
Since the sub-base acts as a platform for the construction vehicles carrying 30 to 35 tons of
construction material, low strength cemented sub-base would crack under the heavy construction
traffic and a design value of 600 MPa is recommended for the analysis and design of pavements with
CTSB layers. CTSB with grading IV of IRC:SP- 89 having strength in the range 0.75- 1.5 MPa is not
recommended for major highways but it can be used for roads with design traffic less than 10 msa.
When the CTSB with UCS in the range of 0.75 to 1.5 MPa is used its modulus value may be taken as 400
MPa as specified in IRC: SP: 89.
Poisson’s ratio value of CTSB layer may be taken as 0.25.
Cemented base
Cemented base layers consist of aggregates, reclaimed asphalt material, crushed slag, crushed
concrete aggregates or soil-aggregate mixture stabilized with chemical stabilizers such as cement, lime,
lime-fly ash or other commercially available stabilizers which can produce mix of requisite strength.
Flexural strength of the cemented base is critical to the satisfactory performance of a bituminous
pavement. Cementitious bases shall be prepared by plant mixing or by a mechanized in-situ mixing
process. The aggregate gradation for CTB shall be as given in table 400-4 of MoRTH specifications.
The CTB material shall have a minimum unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of 4.5 to 7 MPa as per
IRC: SP: 89 in 7/28 days. While the conventional cement stabilized material should attain this strength in
seven days, granular materials and soil- aggregate mixture stabilized with lime, pozzolanic stabilizers,
lime-fly ash etc., should meet the above strength requirement in 28 days since the strength gain in such
materials is a slow process. As considered in the case of sub-bases, average laboratory strength values
should be 1.5 times the required minimum (design) field strength. The cementitious base material
must also meet the durability criteria.
For the functional requirement, the thickness of cement treated bases shall not be less than 100 mm.
Poisson’s ratio value of CTB material may be taken as 0.25.

Strength of cementitious layers keeps on rising with time and an elastic modulus of 5000 MPa may be
considered for analysis of pavements with CTB layers having 7/28 day unconfined compression strength
values ranging between 4.5 to 7 MPa. While the conventional cement treated layer should attain the
above strength in 7 days, lime and lime-flyash stabilised granular materials and soils should achieve
the strength in 28 days since the strength gain in such materials is slow.
SAMI layer
Stress Absorbing Membrane Interlayer (SAMI) of elastomeric modified binder applied at the rate of
10 – 12 kg / 10 m2 covered with 0.1 m3 of 11.2 mm aggregates. For the pavement analysis, the SAMI
layer is not considered as a structural layer, i.e., it shall not be included in the pavement composition
for pavement analysis.
Figure 8-8: Cemented base and cemented sub-base with SAMI at interface of cemented base and
bituminous layer

Bitume
HS Adopted MSA Adopted Modulus of resilience (Mpa) Et Ev
n
For
For
Base Crack
Effective Bitumin CTS Subgrad
& Sub- BT relief CTB
CBR 6% ous B e
base layer
Layers
Layers
HS-II VG-40 30 30 3000 450 5000 600 55 203.0E-06 416.0E-06
8.4.4 Flexible Pavement Design with Cemented Base and Granular Sub Base with Crack Relief Layer
of Aggregate Interlayer above the Cemented Base (Option –III )
The type and pavement structural layers proposed are granular sub base, Cementinious base (CTB),
Aggregate interlayer, Bituminous Surfacing comprising Dense Bituminous Macadam (DBM-2) and
Bituminous Concrete (BC-2).
Cemented base
Cemented base layers consist of aggregates, reclaimed asphalt material, crushed slag, crushed concrete
aggregates or soil-aggregate mixture stabilized with chemical stabilizers such as cement, lime, lime-fly
ash or other commercially available stabilizers which can produce mix of requisite strength. Flexural
strength of the cemented base is critical to the satisfactory performance of a bituminous pavement.
Cementitious bases shall be prepared by plant mixing or by a mechanized in-situ mixing process. The
aggregate gradation for CTB shall be as given in table 400-4 of MoRTH specifications. The CTB
material shall have a minimum unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of 4.5 to 7 MPa as per IRC: SP: 89
in 7/28 days. While the conventional cement stabilized material should attain this strength in seven days,
granular materials and soil- aggregate mixture stabilized with lime, pozzolanic stabilizers, lime-fly ash
etc., should meet the above strength requirement in 28 days since the strength gain in such materials is
a slow process. As considered in the case of sub-bases, average laboratory strength values should be 1.5
times the required minimum (design) field strength. The cementitious base material must also meet the
durability criteria. For the functional requirement, the thickness of cement treated bases shall not be
less than 100 mm. Poisson’s ratio value of CTB material may be taken as 0.25.
above strength in 7 days, lime and lime-flyash stabilised granular materials and soils should achieve the
strength in 28 days since the strength gain in such materials is slow.
Crack relief layer

In case of pavements with CTB, a crack relief layer, provided between the bituminous layer and the
cementitious base, delays the reflection of crack from the CTB layer in to the bituminous layer. The crack
relief layer may consist of dense graded crushed aggregates of 100 mm thickness conforming to MORTH
specifications for wet mix macadam (WMM).
The resilient modulus of a well-graded granular layer depends upon the gradation and the confinement
pressure to which it is subjected to under the application of wheel load. A typical value of 450 MPa is

used for the sandwiched aggregate layer for the analysis of pavement. It shall be compacted to 100% of
the modified Proctor compaction maximum density.
Poisson’s ratio of the granular crack relief layer may be taken as 0.35.
Figure 8-9: Bituminous Surfacing with Cement Treated Base & Granular Sub-Base with Aggregate
Interlayer

Bitum
HS Adopted MSA Adopted Modulus of resilience (Mpa) Et Ev
en
For Base
For Crack
Effective & Sub-
Bitumino BT relief CTB B+SB Subgrade
CBR 6% base
us Layers layer
Layers
HS-II VG-40 30 30 3000 450 5000 173 55 203.0E-06 416.0E-06
8.4.5 Flexible Pavement Design with Cemented base and cemented Sub Base with Crack Relief Layer
of Aggregate Interlayer above the Cemented Base (Option – IV)
The type and pavement structural layers proposed are Cementinious base (CTB), Aggregate interlayer,
Bituminous Surfacing comprising Dense Bituminous Macadam (DBM-2) and Bituminous Concrete (BC-2).
Cemented sub base
For typical cement treated granular sub-base materials, the ECGSB can vary from 2000 to 6000 MPa. Since
the sub-base acts as a platform for the construction vehicles carrying 30 to 35 tons of construction
material, low strength cemented sub-base would crack under the heavy construction traffic and a
design value of 600 MPa is recommended for the analysis and design of pavements with CTSB layers.
CTSB with grading IV of IRC:SP- 89 having strength in the range 0.75- 1.5 MPa is not recommended for
major highways but it can be used for roads with design traffic less than 10 msa. When the CTSB with
UCS in the range of 0.75 to 1.5 MPa is used its modulus value may be taken as 400 MPa as specified in
IRC: SP: 89. Poisson’s ratio value of CTSB layer may be taken as 0.25.

Cemented base
Cemented base layers consist of aggregates, reclaimed asphalt material, crushed slag, crushed concrete
aggregates or soil-aggregate mixture stabilized with chemical stabilizers such as cement, lime, lime-fly
ash or other commercially available stabilizers which can produce mix of requisite strength. Flexural
strength of the cemented base is critical to the satisfactory performance of a bituminous pavement.
Cementitious bases shall be prepared by plant mixing or by a mechanized in-situ mixing process. The
aggregate gradation for CTB shall be as given in table 400-4 of MoRTH specifications. The CTB
material shall have a minimum unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of 4.5 to 7 MPa as per IRC: SP: 89
in 7/28 days. While the conventional cement stabilized material should attain this strength in seven days,
granular materials and soil- aggregate mixture stabilized with lime, pozzolanic stabilizers, lime-fly ash
etc., should meet the above strength requirement in 28 days since the strength gain in such materials is
a slow process. As considered in the case of sub-bases, average laboratory strength values should be 1.5
times the required minimum (design) field strength. The cementitious base material must also meet the
durability criteria.
For the functional requirement, the thickness of cement treated bases shall not be less than 100 mm.
Poisson’s ratio value of CTB material may be taken as 0.25.
above strength in 7 days, lime and lime-flyash stabilised granular materials and soils should achieve the
strength in 28 days since the strength gain in such materials is slow.
Crack relief layer
In case of pavements with CTB, a crack relief layer, provided between the bituminous layer and the
cementitious base, delays the reflection of crack from the CTB layer in to the bituminous layer. The crack
relief layer may consist of dense graded crushed aggregates of 100 mm thickness conforming to MORTH
specifications for wet mix macadam (WMM).
The resilient modulus of a well-graded granular layer depends upon the gradation and the confinement
pressure to which it is subjected to under the application of wheel load. A typical value of 450 MPa is
used for the sandwiched aggregate layer for the analysis of pavement. It shall be compacted to 100% of
the modified Proctor compaction maximum density.
Poisson’s ratio of the granular crack relief layer may be taken as 0.35.

Figure 8-10: Bituminous Surfacing with Cement Treated Base & Granular Sub-Base with Aggregate
Interlayer
Adopted Modulus of resilience (Mpa)

HS Bitumen Adopted MSA Et Ev
For Base
For CRACK
Effective & Sub-
Bituminous BT RELIEF CTB CTSB SUBGRADE
CBR 6% base
Layers LAYER
Layers
HS-II VG-40 30 30 3000 450 5000 600 55 203.0E-06 416.0E-06
8.4.6 Flexible Pavement Design with Foamed Bitumen/Bitumen Emulsion Treated Rap/Aggregate
over Cemented Sub Base (Option – V)

The type and pavement structural layers proposed are Cementinious Sub base (CTSB), RAP (Reclaimed
Asphalt pavement), Bituminous Surfacing comprising Dense Bituminous Macadam (DBM-2) and
Cemented sub base

IRC: SP: 89.
Bitumen emulsion/foamed bitumen treated

reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) base
Reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) material with or without virgin aggregates, treated with
foamed bitumen or bitumen emulsion can be used as the base layer. The minimum thickness of the
emulsion/foam bitumen stabilised RAP layer shall be 100 mm.
The resilient modulus of the material with bitumen emulsion (SS2)/ foamed bitumen shall be taken as
800 MPa though values as high as 3000 MPa have also been achieved on tests conducted on 150 mm
diameter specimens. VG30 bitumen is recommended for preparation of the foamed bitumen used for
stabilizing the RAP/RAP-aggregate material.
Indirect Tensile Strength of 102 mm diameter Marshall specimen of the bitumen emulsion/foamed
bitumen treated material determined as per ASTM:D 6931 [32] should have a minimum value of 100
kPa after soaking and 225 kPa in dry condition at a deformation rate of 50 mm/minute at 25°C.
The recommended Poisson’s ratio is 0.35.

Figure 8-11: Bituminous Surfacing with RAP & Cemented Sub-Base
Adopted
Modulus of
HS Bitumen Adopted MSA Et Ev
resilience
(Mpa)
For Base
For CRACK
Effective & Sub-
Bituminous BT RAP RELIEF CTSB SUBGRADE
CBR 6% base
Layers LAYER
Layers
203.0E-
HS-II VG-40 30 30 3000 800 450 600 55 416.0E-06
06

8.4.7 Flexible Pavement Design with Granular Base and Cemented Sub Base (Option – VI)
The type and pavement structural layers proposed are Cementinious Sub base (CTSB), Wet Mix
Macadam (WMM), Bituminous Surfacing comprising Dense Bituminous Macadam (DBM-2) and
Cemented sub base
IRC: SP: 89.
Base Layer
For the granular base placed on CTSB layer, the resilient modulus may be taken as 300 MPa and 350
MPa for natural gravel and crushed rock respectively. Poisson’s ratio of granular bases and sub-bases
may be taken as 0.35.

Figure 8-12: Bituminous Surfacing with Wet Mix Macadam Base & Cemented Sub-Base
Adopted Modulus of resilience

HS Adopted MSA
(Mpa)
For
Bitumen For Base & Et Ev
Effective
Bituminous Sub- BT CTB CTSB Subgrade
CBR 6%
Layers base
Layers
HS-II VG-40 30 30 3000 350 600 55 203.0E-06 416.0E-06
8.4.8 Pavement Design procedure
Reliability
These Guidelines recommend 90% reliability performance equations for subgrade rutting and fatigue
cracking of bottom bituminous layer for all important roads such as Expressways, National Highways,
State Highways and Urban Roads. For other categories of roads, 90 % reliability is recommended for
design traffic of 20 msa or more and 80 per cent reliability for design traffic less than 20 msa.

Resilient moduli of 2000 MPa (VG30 binder mix for BC as well as DBM) and 3000 MPa (VG40 binder mix
for BC as well as DBM) were considered for less than 20 msa and 20 to 50 msa categories respectively.
It may be noted that, for expressways and national highways, even if the design traffic is 20 msa or less,
VG40 bitumen shall be used for surface as well as DBM layers.
Selecting a trial composition:

In selecting the pavement composition, the designer should be guided by the expected functional
requirements of the layers in a high performing pavement, such as a strong subgrade, a well- drained
sub-base strong enough to withstand the construction traffic loads, a strong crack, rutting and moisture
damage resistant bituminous base and a bituminous surfacing that is resistant to rutting, top-down
cracking and to damages caused by exposure to environment.
Bituminous Mix design and the mix resilient modulus:

Sourcing of the material ingredients for the mix has to be decided and the physical requirements and
properties of the sourced materials should be checked for their conformity with the provisions of
applicable Specifications and these Guidelines. The right proportioning of the mix ingredients or the
design mix should be arrived at by trials and testing. Where the resilient modulus is required to be tested
in accordance with the procedures recommended in these Guidelines, the samples of the design mix
should be appropriately tested as specified. Where the resilient modulus is required to be derived
indirectly by using empirical equations given in these Guidelines or are to be adopted as per a certain
recommended value, the modulus should be selected/determined accordingly and used for design
subject to the compliance with the conditions specified in these Guidelines. In case the resilient modulus
determined in this manner exceeds the limiting values specified in these Guidelines, the latter value
has to be adopted. In case, it is less than the limiting value, the actual value should be adopted in the
design.
Selecting layer thickness:

The selection of trial thicknesses of various layers constituting the pavement should be based on the
designers’ experience and subject to the minimum thicknesses recommended in these Guidelines and
in other relevant specifications (when there is no specific recommendation in these guidelines) from
functional and constructability considerations.
Structural Analysis of the selected pavement structure:

This is to be done by running the IITPAVE software or any other linear elastic layer programme using as
inputs the layer thicknesses, the layer moduli, the layer Poisson’s ratio values, the standard axle load of
80 kN distributed on four wheels (20 kN on each wheel), and a tyre pressure as 0.56 MPa. For carrying
out fatigue damage analysis of cement treated bases, the axle load under consideration and a contact
pressure of 0.80 MPa will be considered. The program will output the stresses, strains and deflections at
selected critical locations in the pavement from which the values of critical mechanistic parameters can
be identified for design.
Computing the allowable strains/stresses:

The allowable strains in the bituminous layer and subgrade for the selected design traffic are to be
estimated using the fatigue and rutting performance (limiting strain) models given in these guidelines.
The inputs to the models are the design period of pavement in terms of cumulative standard axles, the
resilient modulus value of the bottom layer bituminous mix, and the volumetric proportions (air voids
and effective binder) of the mix. For estimating the limiting tensile strain in the CTB layer, the elastic
modulus of the CTB material is an input.

Check for cumulative fatigue damage:
Where cementitious bases are used in the pavement, the cumulative fatigue damage analysis is
required to be done as done in the case of rigid pavement design to make sure that the cumulative
proportion of damage caused by the expected axle load spectrum does not exceed unity.
The minimum thicknesses, as specified in the guidelines, shall be provided to ensure intended
functional requirement of the layer.
Table 8-17: Recommended material properties for structural layers
MaterialType Elastic/Resilient modulus Poisson’s

(MPa) ratio
Bituminous layer withVG40 or Modified 3000 or tested valu (whichever is less) 0.35
Bitumen
Bituminous layer with VG30 2000 or tested value (whichever is less) 0.35
Cement treated base 5000 0.25
Cold recycled base 800 0.35
Granular interlayer 450 0.35
Cement treated sub-base 600 0.25
Unbound granular layers Use Eq. 7.1 0.35
Unbound granular base over 300 for naturalgravel 0.35
CTSB sub-base 350 for crushed aggregates 0.35
Subgrade As per CBR value 0.35

Feasibility Report cum Preliminary design for upgradation of NH-158 connecting to Ras-Beawar- Final Feasibility cum
Mandal in the state of Rajasthan (Package-II) Preliminary Design Report
8.4.9 Pavement Design calculation
For Different MSA and effective CBR thickness of above option are given below.
Table 8-19: Actual tensile and compressive strain
Effective CBR = 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6%
Traffic 30MSA 30MSA 30MSA 30MSA 30MSA 30MSA
OPTION-I OPTION-II OPTION-III OPTION-IV OPTION-V OPTION-VI
aggregate aggregate
Layer General SAMI layer RAP CTSB
interlock(CTB) interlock(CTB+CTSB)
BC-2 40 40 40 40 40 40
DBM-2 110 60 60 60 60 65
AIL 0 0 100 100 0 0
SAMI 0 10 0 0 0 0
RAP 0 0 0 0 110 0
CTB 0 140 180 100 0 0
CTSB 0 200 0 200 200 200
WMM 250 0 0 0 0 150
GSB 200 0 200 0 0 0
Total Crust thickness (mm) 600 450 - 500 410 455
Allowable Tensile Strain (BT) 203.0E-06 203.0E-06 203.0E-06 203.0E-06 203.0E-06 203.0E-06
Allowable Compressive Strain 416.0E-06 416.0E-06 416.0E-06 416.0E-06 416.0E-06 416.0E-06
Allowable Tensile Strain (CTB) - - 074.0E-06 074.0E-06 - -
Actual Tensile Strain (BT) 187.0E-06 044.1E-06 131.0E-06 138.0E-06 118.0E-06 178.0E-06
Actual Compressive Strain 337.0E-06 259.0E-06 197.0E-06 281.0E-06 401.0E-06 395.0E-06
Actual Tensile Strain (CTB) - - 065.0E-06 061.7E-06 - -
Per Km. Cost (Cr) 2.765 2.092 2.186 2.109 2.086 2.074

Feasibility Report cum Preliminary design for upgradation of NH-158 connecting to Ras-Beawar- Final Feasibility cum
Mandal in the state of Rajasthan (Package-II) Preliminary Design Report
Table 8-20: Actual tensile and compressive strain
Effective CBR = 7.5% 7.50% 7.50% 7.50% 7.50% 7.50% 7.50%

Traffic 30MSA 30MSA 30MSA 30MSA 30MSA 30MSA
OPTION-I OPTION-II OPTION-III OPTION-IV OPTION-V OPTION-VI
aggregate aggregate
Layer General SAMI layer RAP CTSB
interlock(CTB) interlock(CTB+CTSB)
BC-2 40 40 40 40 40 40
DBM-2 100 60 60 60 60 55
AIL 0 0 100 100 0 0
SAMI 0 10 0 0 0 0
RAP 0 0 0 0 100 0
CTB 0 135 180 100 0 0
CTSB 0 200 0 200 200 200
WMM 250 0 0 0 0 150
GSB 200 0 200 0 0
Total Crust thickness (mm) 590 435 - 500 400 445
Allowable Tensile Strain (BT) 203.0E-06 203.0E-06 203.0E-06 203.0E-06 203.0E-06 203.0E-06
Allowable Compressive Strain 416.0E-06 416.0E-06 416.0E-06 416.0E-06 416.0E-06 416.0E-06
Allowable Tensile Strain (CTB) - - 074.0E-06 074.0E-06 - -
Actual Tensile Strain (BT) 188.0E-06 044.1E-06 131.0E-06 139.0E-06 119.0E-06 189.0E-06
Actual Compressive Strain 321.0E-06 259.0E-06 185.0E-06 267.0E-06 394.0E-06 394.0E-06
Actual Tensile Strain (CTB) - - 064.0E-06 060.5E-06 - -
Per Km. Cost (Cr) 2.638 2.138 2.186 2.109 2.052 1.946

8.5 RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN
Rigid pavement has been proposed at locations of Toll Plazas. The rigid pavement design for Toll
sections has been designed according to IRC 58-2015. Rigid Pavement with tied concrete shoulder has
been considered .The pavement has been designed for design life of 30 years.
8.5.1 Axle Load Spectrum
Axle load survey has been carried out at locations and the details are given in Table 8-21 and 8-22
below.
Table 8-21: Axle Load Spectrum Asind Location
Rear Single Axle Rear Tandem Axle Rear Tridem Axle

Mid-Point Load Mid-Point of Load Mid-Point
Load Group Frequency Frequency Frequency
of Load Group Load Group Group of Load
(kN) (%) (%) (%)
Group (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) Group (kN)
185-195 190 1.16 380 - 400 390 0.00 530-560 545 0.00
175-185 180 0.00 360 - 380 370 0.82 500-530 515 0.00
165-175 170 1.16 340 - 360 350 4.92 470-500 485 0.00
155-165 160 1.16 320 - 340 330 9.84 440-470 455 0.00
145-155 150 4.65 300 - 320 310 5.74 410-440 425 0.00
135-145 140 3.49 280 - 300 290 5.74 380-410 395 0.00
125-135 130 2.33 260 - 280 270 14.75 350-380 365 0.00
115-125 120 6.98 240 - 260 250 7.38 320-350 335 0.00
105-115 110 8.14 220 - 240 230 13.11 290-320 305 0.00
95-105 100 3.49 200 - 220 210 8.20 260-290 275 0.00
85-95 90 6.98 180 - 200 190 0.00 230-260 245 0.00
< 85 80 60.47 < 180 170 29.51 < 230 215 0.00
100 100 0.00
8.5.2 Design of Sub-grade and Sub-base
Sub-grade CBR of 8% is considered for pavement design.
8.5.3 Dry Lean Concrete
Dry lean concrete of M-10 grade and 150 mm thickness shall be provided as base for better load
distribution, and better support for concrete Paver. DLC having a 7 day average compressive strength of
10 MPa determined as per IRC: SP: 49 over GSB is recommended. DLC will extend beyond the PQC
(including that in shoulder, if any) by 0.5 m on either side.
Fly ash up to 20 percent by weight of Cementinious material shall be used in ordinary Portland cement
43 and 53 grade as part of replacement of cement, where fly ash available 100km radius from project
road.
8.5.4 Pavement Quality Concrete (PQC)
M-40 grade concrete has been considered for the Pavement Quality Concrete. The 28 days
characteristics flexural strength of concrete shall not be less than 4.5Mpa.

The minimum characteristic flexural strength of concrete is to be achieved at site during construction is
4.5 MPa by carrying out mix design for the fly ash mixed PQC. The minimum elastic modulus of concrete
is also to be achieved 30000 MPa.
Fly ash upto 20 percent by weight of Cementinious material shall be used in ordinary Portland cement
43 and 53 grade as part of replacement of cement, where fly ash available 100km radius from project
road.
8.5.5 Design of Rigid Pavement as Per IRC: 58-2015
The proposed rigid pavement crust composition is given in Table 8.27 and the detailed design
calculations are given as Annexure 8.4.
Table 8-18: Rigid Pavement Design for Toll Plaza Location
Pavement Composition Recommended Crust thickness (mm)

PQC 250
DLC 150
GSB 150
Total 550
Sub-grade with material having CBR ≥ 7% 500 mm
Plain Dowel Bar Details 32mm Dia at 300 mm c/c, 450 mm long
Deformed Tie Bar Details 12 mm Dia at 650mm c/c, 650 mm long
8.6 RECOSNTRUCTION STRETCHES
The reconstruction is proposed with flexible pavement, wherever condition of pavement is completely
deteriorated, inadequate sub base and base granular layer thicknesses and also at locations where
existing pavement is having the low embankment height with FRL to GL is less than 500mm. where
above table of trail pit the inadequate sub base and base layer thickness whole length must be
reconstruction.
8.7 STRENGTHENING OF EXISTING PAVEMENT
Detailed pavement condition survey and pavement investigations have been carried out to assess the
strength of the existing flexible pavement. Based on the observations from pavement
condition/investigations, strengthening measures have been finalized.
The characteristic deflection values(Dc) varies from 0.278mm to 2.140mm and the overlay thickness
varies from 50mm to 120mm in terms of BC and DBM, for the sections as given above, however overlay
thickness adopted as of in new design of respective sections, as given in Section above, to match with
thickness widening portion. The PCC shall be provided over the existing pavement sections to correct
profile unevenness as required.
BBD Survey has been carried out at as per the methodology discussed in chapter above and the
summary of characteristic deflection values for main line and control line testing are given in Table
8.28. The detailed BBD analysis for main line testing and control line testing is given as Annexure 3.2 of
Chapter 3.

Table 8-23: Characteristic Deflection (Dc)
Test Chainage (km) Characteristic Deflection

Sl. No.
From To (mm)
1 53.000 54.000 1.254
2 59.500 60.500 1.237
3 64.000 65.000 1.364
4 69.750 70.750 1.627
5 76.000 77.000 1.867
6 85.500 86.500 1.844
7 87.500 88.500 1.304
8 90.000 91.000 0.668
9 95.000 96.000 0.829
10 99.750 100.750 1.186
11 1.400 2.400 1.143

8.8 EMBANKMENT QUANTITY
The table below shows the details of the quantity calculations. The quantity which is generated due to cutting and reconstruction will be utilized in
the embankment after propoer testing and gradation. The material will be used in the high embankment fill and in other granular layers.
Table 8-24:: Emabankment Quantity
Cutting Total Cutting Filling Cutting

filling Total Net
quantity Cutting Required quantity quantity Granular
Design BT layer quantity in Filling Borrow
Sect Design Lengt Bypass/reali in quantity Borrow in in material
Start Quantity Bypass/re- quantity in Quantity
ion End Ch. h (m) gnment Bypass/r in quantity Existing Existing quantity in
ch. (Cum) alignment Section required
ealignme Section (Cum) Road Road existing road
(Cum) (Cum) (Cum)
nt (Cum) (Cum) (Cum) (Cum) (Cum)
30650 33500 2850 Rajiyawas
36045 37100 1055 Pipali Bariya
43000 44000 1000 Hira Bariya
Kaniyakhera
47030 48630 1600
& Kotra
2,3 49600 50600 1000 Ojiyana
47029.5
&4 57950 59770 1820 Badnor 1,03,103 3,47,444 3,99,202 6,04,686 5,01,583 2,96,099 2,57,242 2,49,069 2,52,514
70020 72625 2605 Asind
86860 90100 3240 Sasari
Mod ka
94110 95850 1740
Nimbhera
113000 115600 2600 Mandal

8.9 RECOMMENDATIONS
Section -1
Pavement design for new and reconstruction of carriageway carried out as per guidelines of IRC: 37-
2018 and IRC-58-2015. Above given options of flexible pavement and rigid pavement, life cycle cost
analysis and per km cost analysis had been done. After that more optimistic and viable option for
section -2 is flexible pavement. Table 8-31 provides the summary of the new construction or
reconstruction with flexible pavement (Reconstruction has been start with new GSB layer) for section -
2,3 and 4 (Km.30+050 to Km.116+465)which is 2-lane with paved shoulder and Table 8-30 provides the
summary of toll plaza with Rigid pavement.
Table 8-25: Proposed Pavement Design for toll plaza (Rigid Pavement)
Toll plaza
Pavement Composition Recommended Crust thickness (mm)
PQC 250
DLC 150
GSB 150
Total 550
Sub-grade with material having CBR ≥ 8% 500 mm
Plain Dowel Bar Details 32mm Dia at 300 mm c/c, 450 mm long
Deformed Tie Bar Details 12 mm Dia at 650mm c/c, 650 mm long
Table 8-19: Proposed Pavement Design (Flexible)
Option-4 Foamed Bitumen/Bitumen Emulsion Treated RAP/Aggregate Over Cemented Sub Base
Proposed Crust Composition (mm)
HS-II 30.050 to 74.000
Effective Design CBR (%) 6
Design MSA 30
Grade of Bitumen VG-40
BC-2 40
DBM-2 60
RAP 110
CTSB 200
Total 410

Km wise Pavement Design
Table 8-27: Proposed Km wise Pavement Design
Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
Chainage configurati New Construction Reconstruction + widening
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
Rigid pavement Flexible Pavement Rigid pavement Flexible Pavement
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
Fro PQ GS BC B RA CTS PQ GS BC- B RA CT
To DLC gra M gra DLC gra M gra
m C B -2 M P B C B 2 M P SB
de M de de M de
-2 -2
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
mm
2-lane with Widening /
3005 3065 20
55 600 30 paved 40 60 110 Reconstruction with
0 0 0
shoulder flexible pavement
2-lane with New construction
3065 3100
56 350 30 paved 40 60 110 200 500 with flexible
0 0
shoulder pavement
3100 3167
57 670 30 paved 40 60 110 0 200 500 with flexible
0 0
shoulder pavement
3167 3180 20
0 0 0
3180 3200
0 0
shoulder pavement
3200 3300
0 0
shoulder pavement
3300 3350
0 0
shoulder pavement
62 3350 3400 500 30 2-lane with 40 60 110 20 Widening /

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
0 0 paved 0 Reconstruction with
3400 3465 20
0 0 0
3465 3530 20
0 0 0
3530 3582 20
0 0 0
3582 3605 20
0 0 0
3605 3700
0 0
shoulder pavement
3700 3710
0 0
shoulder pavement
3710 3730 20
0 0 0
3730 3760 2-lane with 20 Widening /
70 300 30 40 60 110

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
3760 3810 20
0 0 0
3810 3845 20
0 0 0
3845 3900 20
0 0 0
3900 3970 20
0 0 0
3970 4000 20
0 0 0
4000 4060 20
0 0 0
4060 4080 20
0 0 0
4080 4180 20
0 0 0

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
4180 4196 20
0 0 0
4196 4224 20
0 0 0
4224 4237 20
0 0 0
4237 4300 20
0 0 0
4300 4348
0 0
shoulder pavement
4348 4360 20
0 0 0
4360 4400
0 0
shoulder pavement
4400 4500 20
0 0 0

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
4560 4585 20
0 0 0
4585 4652 20
0 0 0
4652 4700 20
0 0 0
4700 4800
0 0
shoulder pavement
4800 4863
0 0
shoulder pavement
4863 4912 20
0 0 0
4912 4940 20
0 0 0
4940 4960 2-lane with 20 Widening /
95 200 30 40 60 110

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
4960 4980
0 0
shoulder pavement
4980 5006 20
0 0 0
5006 5070
0 0
shoulder pavement
5070 5100 20
0 0 0
10 5100 5200 20
1000 30 paved 40 60 110 Reconstruction with
0 0 0 0
10 5200 5300 20
1 0 0 0
10 5300 5400 20
2 0 0 0
10 5400 5410 20
3 0 0 0

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
10 5410 5473 20
4 0 0 0
10 5473 5500 20
5 0 0 0
10 5500 5600 20
6 0 0 0
10 5600 5645 20
7 0 0 0
10 5645 5669 20
8 0 0 0
10 5669 5700 20
9 0 0 0
11 5700 5800 20
0 0 0 0
11 5800 5865 20
1 0 0 0
11 5865 5900 350 30 2-lane with 40 60 110 0 200 500 New construction

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
2 0 0 paved with flexible
shoulder pavement
11 5900 5977
770 30 paved 40 60 110 0 200 500 with flexible
3 0 0
shoulder pavement
11 5977 6025 20
4 0 0 0
Flyover Approach
2-lane with
11 6025 6100 with Retaining
750 30 paved 40 60 110 200 500
5 0 0 Structure And Service
shoulder
Road
Flyover Approach
2-lane with
350 30 paved 40 60 110 200 500
shoulder
Road
11 6135 6219 20
7 0 0 0
11 6219 6300 20
8 0 0 0
11 6300 6355 20
9 0 0 0

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
12 6355 6400 20
0 0 0 0
12 6400 6500 20
1 0 0 0
12 6500 6600 20
2 0 0 0
12 6600 6645 20
3 0 0 0
12 6645 6700 20
4 0 0 0
12 6700 6795 20
5 0 0 0
12 6795 6882 20
6 0 0 0
12 6882 6900 20
7 0 0 0

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
8 0 0 paved 0 Reconstruction with
12 7000 7002 20
9 0 0 0
13 7002 7085
0 0 0
shoulder pavement
Two lane carriageway
2-lane with
13 7085 7140 with service road
550 30 paved 40 60 110 200 500
1 0 0 (Newconstruction/Re
shoulder
consrtuction)
Flyover Approach
2-lane with
150 30 paved 40 60 110 200 500
shoulder
Road
13 7155 7168
3 0 5
shoulder pavement
2-lane with
13 7168 7183
150 30 paved At Major Bridge
4 5 5
shoulder
13 7183 7260 20
5 5 0 0

Desig
Design Lane
Sl. n MS
No Lengt A Remarks
(m) on
h (m)
D D
Sub W Sub Sub W Sub
de M de de M de
-2 -2
mm
Flyover Approach
2-lane with
1000 30 paved 40 60 110 200 500
shoulder
Road
13 7360 7372 20
7 0 0 0
2-lane with
13 7372 7397
250 30 paved 250 150 150 500 Toll plaza
8 0 0
shoulder
13 7397 7400 20
9 0 0 0

9 STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL
9.1 GENERAL
The project road is having one ROB, one major bridge, 14 minor bridges, 83 slab culverts, 3 Box
Culvertsand144 pipe culverts, along the project highway.
All minor bridges are havingRCC solid slab type superstructure and open foundation with stone masonry
wall type substructure.
The structural condition of most of the culverts is generally fair to poor. The pipe culverts are generally
working and in fair condition. Most of the culverts having dia of pipe less than 0.6 m, proposed for
reconstruction as per the Manual of Specifications and Standards. Poor maintenance has led to
improper functioning of the culverts. Adequate maintenance of the culverts in many areas can result in
proper functioning of the culverts.
Table 9-1 gives the summary of existing structures along the project road.
Table 9-1: Details of Existing Structures
Structure Type Total

Existing ROB 0
Major Bridges 0
Minor Bridges 07
Slab Culverts 29
Pipe Culverts 74
Box Culvert 2
Total 112
9.2 HYDROLOGICAL STUDY
9.2.1 Main Objective
i. The main objective of the hydrological and hydraulic study is to determine the required size of
drainage structures to allow the estimated design flow of the streams to cross the road safely.
ii. To check whether waterway of proposed structures are sufficient to transmit the flow without
risk so that appropriate decisions could be taken concerning their span arrangement.
iii. To estimate the peak discharge for 100-year return period flood
In order to achieve these objectives above mentioned, the work flow of hydrological & hydraulic
analysis has been given in schematic diagram below:

Rainfall
Studies in Hydrological Analysis of Hydraulic Analysis of
project area Bridge Bridge
Toposheets -Catchment Delineation -Fixation of Waterway
-Discharge Calculations -Highest Flood Level
Toposurvey
-Design Discharge -Height/Vertical Clearance
data
Analysis -Scour & Founding Level
Figure 9-1 : General studies of Hydrological and Hydraulic Analysis
9.2.2 General Description of the Project Site
The bridges site in Ras - Mandal section in the state of Rajasthan. The road alignment falls under hydro
metrological Luni sub zone 1(a).
and other two rivers are flowing from right to left in the direction of increasing chainage.
9.2.3 Data Collection and Data Analysis for Hydrological Study
Toposheets, Rainfall Data and topographical survey data are the primary basis of hydrological studies.
The data requirement and their applications are summarized in the table as given below:
Table 9-2: Toposheets, Rainfall Data & Topographical Survey Data
Sl. No Title Category Source Relevant Information

(Primary/Secondary)
1 Toposheets Primary Survey of India Mark the catchment area, length of the
(1:50,000) stream and fall in elevation from
originating point to the point of
crossing & slope of the stream could be
determined to calculate the design
discharge of the proposed bridge
location
2 Rainfall Primary IMD Rainfall 100-yr 24-hour Rainfall is used to
Map from CWC calculate the design discharge
Subzone reports
3 Topographical Primary Survey at field/ To make cross section and longitudinal
survey data site along the slopes of the Nala / stream used in
alignment computation
Source: Survey of India, CWC subzone reports and field data
9.2.4 Hydrological and Hydraulic Study for Bridges
For performing the hydrological and hydraulic analysis which essentially need the design flood of a
specific return period for fixing the waterway vis-à-vis the design High Flood Level (HFL) of bridges
depending upon their size and importance to ensure safety as well as economy. As per IRC 5-2015-

Section I General Features of Design specify that the waterway of a bridge is to be designed for a
maximum flood of 100 years return period.
Earlier bridges were constructed for 50 years return period probably. Based on the revised IRC codes
looking to the climatic change factors, 100 year return period have been adopted for design of bridges.
Existing bridges of major bridges nature are mostly submersible bridges. To make these bridges for
continuous traffic movement, high level bridges have been proposed.
The following methods can be used to estimate the peak discharge for bridge sites on major and minor
streams:
 Empirical Formulae
 Rational Method
 Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method
The above all methods have been discussed in detail as indicated below in subhead of Hydrological
Aspect and Hydraulic Aspect.
9.2.5 Empirical Formulae
The empirical formulae used for the estimation of the flood peak are essentially regional formulae
based on the statistical correlation of the observed peak and important catchment properties. Dicken’s
method (empirical formulae) most popular method as given in IRC: SP-13-2004 and the formula for
assessment of peak discharge only from the catchment area less than 25 sq. Km.
a. Dicken’s Method
Q = CA3/4
Where,
Q = Peak discharge in cumecs
A = Catchment area in sq km
C= Dicken’s coefficient
= 11-14 where the annual rainfall is 600 mm to 1200 mm
= 14-19 where the annual rainfall is more than 1200 mm
= 22 in Western Ghats
9.2.6 Rational Method
Discharge Estimation for the Catchment Areas Less than 25 sq km
This is a well-known method as given in IRC: SP-13-2004 and the formula for assessment of peak
discharge from project catchment takes into account rainfall, runoff under various circumstances time
of concentration and critical intensity of rainfall.
Here, 100 year Peak Discharge is calculated by following formula
Qmax = 0.0278 P f A Ic
Where,
Qmax = design flood (m3/s) for 100 year return period
f = Areal Distribution/spread Factor
C = Coefficient of runoff for the catchment characteristics
A = catchment area (Ha)
Ic = Critical intensity of rainfall in cm/hr during the time of concentration.

Time of concentration has been taken from IRC: SP: 13-2004 Equation no. 4.9
0.385
𝐿3
tc = (0.87 × 𝐻 )
Where,
tc = time of concentration (hours)
L = the distance from the critical point to the structure (km)
H = the fall in level from the critical point to the structure (m)
𝐹 𝑇+1
Intensity of rainfall has been determined from formula 𝐼𝑐 = 𝑇 (𝑡 ) in cm/hr
𝑐 +1
F = Total Precipitation (cm).
T = Duration of Strom (Hours).
The value of runoff coefficient (P) depends on the porosity of the soil, vegetation cover, surface storage
initial state of wetness of soil, area , shape & size of the catchment and may be taken from the below
given Table.
Table 9-3: Maximum Value of P (Table 4.1: IRC: SP: 13-2004)
Sl. No Description of Catchment Value of P

1 Steep, bare rock and also city pavements 0.90
2 Rock, steep but wooded 0.80
3 Plateaus, lightly covered 0.70
4 Clayey soils, stiff and bare 0.60
5 Clayey soils, stiff and bare and lightly covered 0.50
6 Loam, lightly cultivated or covered 0.40
7 Loam, largely cultivated 0.30
8 Sandy Soil, light growth 0.20
9 Sandy soil, light growth covered, heavy brush 0.10
The valueof areal distribution factor depends on catchment area as shown in below graph given in IRC-
SP-13.
Figure 9-2 : f -Curve
Thus after calculating the above parameters, the 100-year return period peak discharge has been
calculated using the formula as given above.

9.2.7 Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method
Where catchment area is greater than 25 sq km, the flood discharge have been calculated using the
synthetic unit hydrograph method specified in Flood Estimation subzone Report of CWC has been
adopted for fixing the design discharge for the bridge. The proposed road falls under Luni subzone 1a.
In this method 1 hour Synthetic Unit Hydrograph is determined for an ungauged catchment. Following
steps have been followed as suggested in CWC report for determination of discharge by this method.
a) Physiographic parameters of the ungauged catchment viz. A, L, Lc and S have been determined
from toposheets or field observations.
b) SUH parameters for Subzone 1(a) have been computed using the following equations:
tP = 0.257 (A)0.409 (S)0.432 hours

qP = 2.165 (tp)-0.893 cumec/sq km
W50 = 2.654 (qp)-0.921 hours
W75 = 1.672 (qp)-0.816 hours
WR50 = 1.245 (qp)-0.571 hours
WR75 = 0.816 (qp)-0.559 hours
Tm = tp+tr/2 hours
TB = 6.299 (tp)0.612 hours
Qp = qp x A cumec
c) The estimated parameters of unit hydrograph in (b) has been plotted and the plotted points were
joined to draw synthetic unit hydrograph. The discharge ordinates of SUH at interval of unit hour
duration were found out from the equation of the plotted graph. The obtained value of the
ordinates is adjusted in order to get proper unit hydrograph shape and area under the unit
hydrograph. The unit hydrograph ordinates are summed up and multiplied by the unit hour
duration and compared with the volume of 1 cm direct runoff depth over catchment computed by
the formula as given below:
Q = (A X d) / (tr x 0.36)
d) The design storm duration has been taken as equal to base period of unit graph (TB =1.1* tp).
e) Point rainfall is read from the given plate in CWC report for 100 year 24 hr rainfall and has been
converted to area rainfall at design storm duration.
f) The areal rainfall of design storm duration is split into 1-hour rainfall increments using time
distribution coefficients.
g) Estimation of effective rainfall excess unit has been done after taking design loss rate into account.
h) Base flow has been estimated based upon the catchment area.
i) The effective rainfall ordinates are arranged against the ordinates of the UG in such a way that the
maximum value of rainfall is placed against the peak value of the UG, the next lower rainfall values
are arranged against the next lower values of the UG in appropriate order. The order of the
effective rainfall values thus obtained is reversed to get the critical sequence. The effective rainfall
values are applied to 1 hour unit hydrograph ordinates. The first rainfall excess value is multiplied
with each of the UG ordinate to obtain the corresponding direct runoff ordinates. The computation
is repeated with the remaining rainfall excess values & the direct surface runoff derived from each
successive rainfall excess is lagged by 1 hour. The total direct surface runoff for various time

periods is added to get the direct surface runoff hydrograph. The base flow is then added to each
of the direct surface runoff hydrograph ordinate, to get the values of design flood hydrograph
ordinates.
9.2.8 Bridge at canal
Proposed alignment is crossing Khari Right Main Canal in one location at ch. 74.485 Km of minor bridge
in nature offtaking from Khari River. The structure shall be proposed for sufficient width and vertical
clearance as per irrigation requirement.
9.2.9 Afflux Calculation
Afflux calculations are carried out as procedures given in IRC: 5-2015 using orifice formula and
Molesworth formula used for calculation purpose.
9.2.10 Scour Depth Calculation
Scour calculation for pier & abutment or box type bridges has been carried out using IRC SP: 13-2004
and IRC: 78-2014. Scour depth has been calculated using following formula:
dsm = 1.34 x ( Db2/Ksf)1/3

Where,
dsm = Mean scour depth below HFL
Db = (Q/L)
Q = Discharge adopted for scour depth calculations (after increasing the design discharge as
per clause 703.2 of IRC 78: 2014)
L = Clear waterway after making deductions for obstruction upto HFL
Db = The design discharge for foundation per metre with effective linear waterway
Ksf = Silt factor for a representative sample of bed material obtained upto the level of
anticipated deepest scour
HFL = Highest flood level
Mean scour depth at abutment = 1.27 * dsm
Maximum scour level at abutment = HFL- 1.27 * dsm
Similarly,
Mean scour depth at pier = 2 * dsm
Maximum scour level at pier = HFL - 2 * dsm
The founding level shall be fixed on the basis of calculated scour level and bearing capacity of soil &
rock.
9.2.11 Drainage Plan of the Project Area
and other two rivers are flowing from right to left in the direction of increasing chainage. Other minor
bridge whose hydrological analysis is carried out having catchment area less than 25 sq. Km and streams
are of local stream in nature.
Part of the project road from 0 to 36.500 Km, contribution of all rainwater through tributaries are from
right to left and joined in Lilri river. This Lilri river is crossing the project road at ch. 1.443 Km. A

schematic diagram of Figure ES-3 shows the drainage pattern of this part duly marked on toposheets
where blue line shows the main river path, green line shows tributaries joining main river and magenta
colour line for catchment area.
Similarly, Part of the project road from ch. 36.500 Km to 64.000 Km, country slope is from right to left
side of the project road considering increasing chainage. Only small stream lie in-between these part
where minor bridges and culverts are proposed. A schematic diagram of Figure ES-4 shows the drainage
pattern of this part duly marked on toposheets.
Similarly, last part of the project road from ch. 64.000 Km to 116.700 Km, country slope is from right to
left side of the project road considering increasing chainage. Two main rivers namely Khari River at ch.
71.650 Km & Mansi River at ch. 92.554 Km crossing alignment from right to left considering increasing
change where major bridges are proposed. Other than these locations minor bridges and culverts are
proposed only. A schematic diagram of Figure ES-5 shows the drainage pattern of this part duly marked
on toposheets. All figures showing drainage plan of whole stretch has been shown below.
9.2.12 Rainwater Harvesting Proposal
As the project area having scarcity of water, hence rainwater harvesting pits has been proposed at every
500m interval of storm water drain or in case, the drain length is less 500 m, pits are provided at end
point of the storm water drain before meeting to nalla near culverts, minor bridges and major bridges
on both side of the road. The recommendations are given in IRC: SP : 42-2014 clause 10.7.3 regarding
provision of rainwater harvesting.
The schematic figure is shown as below in Fig. 9-3.
Figure 9-3: Rainwater Harvesting arrangement

9.2.13 Structural Proposal improvement
Due to climatic conditions & changes and recommendation of 100 year flood return period, following
proposal has been modified as given below:
9.2.14 Summary and Recommendations
Flood discharge estimated in different ways should be compared & highest of these should be adopted
as design discharge in general. Data from Khari irrigation tank also taken into consideration for Khari
River Bridge. Accordingly, the design discharge has been established for all the bridges. Based on the
highest discharge, HFL has been reassessed using slope area method for the hydraulic calculation,
provision of spans and scour levels.
Table 9-4: List of Structures for Hydrological Study
S. No. Design Chainage Type of Structure Proposed Span Modification Proposal

1 46+072 MNB 3x18 New Construction
2 52+527 MNB 2x4.5 Reconstruction
4 52+836 MNB 5x2.9 Repair & Widen
6 71+76 MJB 5x30 New Construction
9.3 STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL
Recommendation on improvement of structures includes widening, retaining with repairs and

reconstruction/new construction of bridges and other cross drainage structures depending on its
present structural condition, available width of carriageway, history/past record of submergence of the
existing carriageway.
9.3.1 Major Bridges
The major bridge is also proposed at km 71+760 on River based on the finding of hydrological studies.
The details of major bridges are given Table 9-5.
Table 9-5: Proposed Major Bridges
Sl, Existing Design Existing Structure Details Proposed Structure Details

Improvement
No Chainage Chainage
Proposal
(km) (km)
Span / Width Span (C/C Width
Type Type
Length (m) of exp.) (m)
PSC New
1 - 71+160 - - - 10x30 16
Girder Construction

9.3.2 ROB’s
Table 9-6: List of RoB’S
Sl, Existing Design Existing Structure Details Proposed Structure Details

Improvement
No Chainage Chainage
Proposal
(km) (km)
Span / Width Span (C/C of Width
Type Type
Length (m) exp.) (m)
Nil
9.3.3 Minor Bridges
The improvement proposal is given below.
Table 9-7: Minor Bridges to be repaired and widening

Sl. Improvement
Chainage Chainage
No Proposal
(km) (km)
Span / Span (C/C
Type Width Width (m) Type
Length of exp.)
RCC Widening with
1 79+028 52+836 RCC Slab 5x2.9 12.2 5x2.9 16
Box repair
Table 9-8: Minor Bridges In Re-Construction

Sl. Improvement
Chainage Chainage
No Proposal
(km) (km)
Span / Width Width
Type Span (C/C of exp.) Type
Length (m) (m)
1 79+338 52+527 RCC Slab 3x2.8 12 2x4.5 (Clear span) 16 RCC Box Re-Construction
2 79+210 52+655 RCC Slab 3x2.9 12 2x4.5 (Clear span) 16 RCC Box Re-Construction
3 78+296 53+578 RCC Slab 5x2.9 12.2 3x5.0 (Clear span) 16 RCC Box Re-Construction
Table 9-9: Minor Bridges in New-Construction
Existing Structure
Existing Design Proposed Structure Details
Sl. Details Improvement
Chainage Chainage
No Proposal
(km) (k m)
Span /
Type Width Span (C/C of exp.) Width (m) Type
Length
RCC New
1 - 46+072 - - - 3x18.0 16
Girder Construction


9.3.4 Grade separated structures
Following are the grade separated structures proposed along the project road. Vehicle underpasses are
having minimum vertical clearance of 5.5m while the grade-II vehicle underpasses with minimum
vertical clearance of 4m.
Table 9-10: Improvement Proposal of VUP
Sl. Design Chainage
Span arrangement Width (m)
No (Km) Proposal Type
(m)
Nil
Table 9-11: Improvement Proposal of VUP Grade-II
Design Improvement Proposal

Sl.
Chainage Span arrangement Width (m)
No Proposal Type
(Km) (m)
1 60+810 New construction RCC Box 1x12x4 13
9.3.5 Culverts
Reconstruction is proposed for structurally poor slab/arch culverts by RCC type box culverts. Since the
structures are proposed for two lanes with paved shoulder, total width is proposed for slab culverts &
pipe culverts as per road cross section. For slab culverts, widening is to be done up to the overall width
of the road with RCC box of same span. All existing HP culverts having pipe diameter less than 0.9Ф
have been proposed for replacement with 1.2Ф pipe. All new construction/reconstruction of HP
culverts is to be done by 1.2Фm pipe. Widening and repair of existing structure shall match overall
width of road.
Table 9-12: Improvement Proposal of Culverts by Pipe Culvert
Sl. Ex. Design

Existing Section
No Chainage( Chainage No. Span/ Dia (m) Proposal Type Span
Type type
. Km) (km)
1 103+500 30+118 1 0.9 Pipe Reconstruction PC 1x1.2 2-Lane
2 91+209 41+015 1 0.9 Pipe Reconstruction PC 1x1.2 2-lane
4 89+568 42+552 1 1.0 Slab Culvert Reconstruction PC 1x1.2 2-lane

Sl. Ex. Design

Existing Section
No Chainage( Chainage No. Span/ Dia (m) Proposal Type Span
Type type
. Km) (km)
22 76+298 55+570 1 0.6 pipe Reconstruction PC 1x1.2 2-lane
39 64+980 66+087 1 0.6 Slab Culvert Reconstruction PC 1x1.2 2-lane
Table 9-13: List of pipe culverts for Repair and Widening
Ex. Design Span Existing

Sl. Existing Span Section
Chainage Chainage No. /Dia Width Proposal Type
No. Type (m) type
(KM) (KM) (m) (m)
1 85+390 46+720 1 1.2 Pipe 15.1 Repair & widen PC 1x1.2 2-lane
2 75+049 56+817 1 0.9 pipe 12.0 Repair & widen PC 1x0.9 2-lane
3 74+438 57+426 1 1.2 Pipe 12.5 Repair& widen PC 1x1.2 2-lane
4 73+258 58+586 1 0.9 Pipe 12.6 Repair& Widen PC 1x0.9 2-lane
5 67+852 63+224 1 1.2 Pipe 12.7 Repair& Widen PC 1x1.2 2-lane

Table 9-14:Improvement Proposal for Slab Culverts
Ex. Design Existing Section

Sl. Span/Dia Span
Chainage Chainage No. Existing Type Width Proposal Type type
No. (m) (m)
(Km) (Km) (m)
1 92+857 39+565 1 2.2 Slab Culvert 7.9 Repair & Widen BC 1x2.2 2-lane
Table 9-15: List of Culverts to be reconstructed by Box Culvert
Ex. Design Section

Sl. Span /
Chainage Chainage Nos. Existing Type Proposal Type Span(m) type
No. Dia (m)
(Km) (km)
1 1+220 31+841 1 2.0 Slab Culvert Reconstruction BC 1x2.0x2.0 2-Lane
6 2+188 32+802 1 4.0 Pipe Reconstruction BC 1x4x3.0 2-Lane
7 100+286 33+467 1 3.5 Slab Culvert Reconstruction - 1x3.0x3.0 2-Lane
8 100+130 33+625 2 1.6 Slab Culvert Reconstruction BC 1x3x2.0 2-Lane
16 89+038 43+077 1 0.5 Pipe Reconstruction BC 1x2.0x2.0 2-Lane
17 88+891 43+147 2 1.5 Pipe Reconstruction BC 1X3.0X2.0 2-Lane
22 73+765 58+086 2.0 0.6 Slab Culvert Reconstruction BC 1x2.0x2.0 2-Lane
23 73+602 58+253 1.0 1.0 Slab Culvert Reconstruction BC 1x2.0x2.0 2-Lane
27 53+789 73+673 2 1.5 Pipe Reconstruction BC 1x2.0x2.0 2-Lane

Table 9-16: List of Additional Box Culverts
Design Section type

Chainage (km)
1 31+300 New Construction BC 1x4.0x3.0 2-Lane
Table 9-17: List of New Pedstrain Subway
Sl. Design
Span Vertical Width (m)
No Chainage (Km) Proposal Type
arrangement (m) clearance (m)
1 35+360 New Construction RCC Box 1x4.8 2.75 14
Table 9-18: List of Culverts to be retained
Existing Structure Type

Ex. Design
Sl. No No. of Existing width Proposal
Chainage(km) Chainage(km) Type
span (m)
Nil
9.4 SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL FOR CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
The summary of proposed structures on the project road is presented below:

Table 9-19: Summary of Proposed Structures
Retained
SR. Type of proposed Repair & New Total
with Reconstruction
NO. structure Widening Structures Structures
Repair
1 MJB 0 0 0 1 1
2 MNB 0 1 3 1 5
3 Pipe 0 5 42 0 47
4 Slab 0 0 0 0 0
5 Box 0 3 27 20 50
6 ROB 0 0 0 0 0
7 VUP 0 0 0 0 0
8 VUP Grade-II 0 0 0 4 4
9 Pedestrian Subway 0 0 0 1 1
Total 0 9 72 27 108

10 COST ESTIMATE
10.1 GENERAL
Cost estimation is important for the feasibility study as it provides vital input to the economic and
financial evaluation of the project. The estimate has been prepared for strengthening & widening the
existing stretches to two lane with paved and granular shoulders (Ch. 30+050 to Ch.74+000) as
proposed. Quantities for all the structures are calculated separately to arrive cost. The summary of the
Cost Estimate for two lane with paved and granular shoulders (Ch. 30+050 to Ch.74+000) including
strengthening of the existing pavement, strengthening / widening/reconstruction of existing structures,
new bridges on the proposed bypasses and realignments etc is given in this chapter.
10.2 ADOPTION OF UNIT RATES
10.2.1 Based on Rate Analysis
The basic rates of construction items have been analyzed on the basis of Standard Data Book adding 5%
escalation per annum to achieve rate of 2016-17. Minimum wages of labours have been considered as
market rate. Market rates have been adopted for Cement, Steel and Bitumen prices updated.
Transportation Costs are taken from NH SOR 2016.
10.2.2 Based on Market rates
For items where these rates are not available, the rates were adopted as per previous experience of the
consultants / market rates. Appropriate escalation of 5% is considered to derive the prevailing
percentage over these rates. The basic rates of machinery have also been adopted as per previous
experience/market rates. For rate analysis of bituminous items, the basic rates of all grade of bitumen
recommended in the project are latest rates of Mathura Refinery.
10.3 BILL OF QUANTITIES FOR CIVIL WORKS
The bill of quantities for civil works has been prepared on the basis of improvement proposal given
chapter 7, 8 and 9.
10.4 COSTING FOR SAFETY DEVICES
Adequate numbers of road signage and pavement markings have been considered as a safety measures
while making costing for road safety to give proper information to the road users to avoid accident on
the project road
10.5 TOTAL COST ESTIMATES
The detailed cost estimates attached are given in Annexure 10.1 of Volume-IB. The rate analysis is given
in Annexure 10.2 of Volume-IB. The summary of project cost for Package 2 has been worked out and is
given Table 10-1;

Table 10-1: General Abstract of Cost Package-2 (km 30+050 to Km 74+000)
Sr. Amount
Particulars Amount (INR)
No. (Cr.)
1 Site clearance and Dismanteling 8,76,30,795 8.76
2 Earth Work 20,81,17,899 20.81
Grannular Sub Base Courses and Base Courses ( Non-
3 15,70,30,976 15.70
Bituminous )
4 Bituminous Courses 41,35,97,476 41.36
5 Culverts 9,63,63,904 9.64
6 Bridges
a) Minor Bridges 3,56,92,588 3.57
b) Major Bridges 5,03,67,690 5.04
c) FO, ROB 0 0.00
d) VUP/PUP 1,83,49,497 1.83
e) Repair and Rehabilitation of bridges and culverts 1,54,012 0.02
f) RE Wall, Retaining Wall, Boundary Wall 23,13,82,320 23.14
7 Drainage & Protective Works 9,54,69,065 9.55
8 Junctions 9,20,44,494 9.20
9 Traffic signs, Road markings and other road appurtunences 4,91,84,492 4.92
10 Miscellaneous Works 13,17,03,814 13.17
11 Maintenance of roads 1,66,34,480 1.66
12 Toll Plaza 3,58,05,300 3.58
Total Civil Construction Cost Excluding GST (A) 1,71,95,28,801 171.95

Civil Construction Cost Per Km 3,91,24,660 3.91
GST (7% of A) 12,03,67,016 12.04
Total Civil Construction Cost Including GST 1,83,98,95,817 183.98

11 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

Table 11-20: Profit & Loss Statement – HAM Case (Package-1)
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037
Revenue 13.65 28.18 29.30 30.63 31.95 33.22 34.57 35.78 37.27 38.78 40.48 42.43 44.69 47.31 50.48 26.49
Annuity 0.35 1.42 2.39 3.68 5.06 6.52 8.18 9.85 11.96 14.28 17.02 20.28 24.17 28.81 34.46 19.59
Interest 10.14 20.21 20.02 19.73 19.30 18.74 18.02 17.14 16.08 14.80 13.28 11.47 9.30 6.73 3.65 0.49
O&M Payments 3.16 6.56 6.88 7.23 7.59 7.97 8.37 8.79 9.23 9.69 10.17 10.68 11.22 11.78 12.37 6.41
Operating
6.8 9.8 10.1 10.3 10.6 12.1 12.4 12.7 13.0 13.4 15.3 15.7 16.1 16.5 17.0 5.5
Expenses
Routine 0.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.4 1.9
MMR Cost 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 0.0
Other (Lighting,
1.6 3.7 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.9 6.2 6.5 3.6
insurance, misc.)
PBITDA 6.85 18.34 19.21 20.29 21.35 21.13 22.18 23.07 24.23 25.39 25.19 26.75 28.60 30.81 33.52 21.01
less Book
Amortization 6.67 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 18.41 9.79
amount
PBIT 0.18 (0.07) 0.80 1.88 2.94 2.72 3.77 4.66 5.82 6.98 6.78 8.34 10.19 12.40 15.11 11.22
less Interest on
4.52 9.51 8.60 7.55 6.51 5.47 4.43 3.39 2.34 1.30 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Senior Loan
PBT (4.35) (9.58) (7.79) (5.67) (3.58) (2.75) (0.66) 1.27 3.48 5.68 6.48 8.34 10.19 12.40 15.11 11.22
less Taxes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.74 1.21 2.68 5.07 5.87 6.74 7.74 5.13
PAT (4.35) (9.58) (7.79) (5.67) (3.58) (2.75) (0.66) 1.00 2.74 4.47 3.81 3.28 4.33 5.66 7.37 6.09

Construction Support, Annuity, Interest and O&M Payments
Table 11-21: HAM Pay-out – Construction Support (Package 1)
Payment milestone Price index Construction support

1st 210 26.7
2nd 215 27.4
3rd 218 27.8
4th 221 28.1
5th 223 28.4
Total 138.5
*all figures in INR Cr
Table 11-22: HAM Year-wise Pay-outs – Annuity, Interest and O&M (Package 1)
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037
Annuity 0.35 1.42 2.39 3.68 5.06 6.52 8.18 9.85 11.96 14.28 17.02 20.28 24.17 28.81 34.46 19.59
Interest 10.14 20.21 20.02 19.73 19.30 18.74 18.02 17.14 16.08 14.80 13.28 11.47 9.30 6.73 3.65 0.49
O&M 3.16 6.56 6.88 7.23 7.59 7.97 8.37 8.79 9.23 9.69 10.17 10.68 11.22 11.78 12.37 6.41
Total 13.65 28.18 29.30 30.63 31.95 33.22 34.57 35.78 37.27 38.78 40.48 42.43 44.69 47.31 50.48 26.49
Table 11-23: Summary of all payments in HAM (Package 1)
HAM Pay-outs - Summary

Construction Support 138.47
Annuity 208.02
Interest 219.09
O&M Payments 138.09
Sum Total 703.67

11.2.12 Hybrid Annuity Model (For Package-2 Km30+050 to Km 116+750)
As an additional option, project was analyzed on Hybrid Annuity Model for PPP projects. Hence, the
project financials have been worked out as per the Model Concession Agreement for PPP in Hybrid
Annuity Projects issued in November 2015 by Government of India.
Key Assumptions
The main assumptions made for undertaking the financial analysis are as follows:
 Civil Cost: The EPC/civil cost of the project has been considered as INR 171.95 Cr.
 Period of Analysis: The construction period for the project has been assumed as 36 months.
Total concession period including construction period is considered as 18 years (3 Years
Construction Period + 15 Years Operation Period)
 Project Phasing: The development phasing for the Project has been considered is given in
following table:
Table 11-24: CAPEX Phasing (Package 2 & Package 3)
FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022

Construction Phasing 20% 50% 30%
 A Debt-Equity ratio of 70:30 has been assumed.

 An inflation factor of 5% (and hence, price index multiple of (1.05)n, where ‘n’ is number of
years from appointed date, is considered. This factor is used to ascertain year on year escalation
in O&M Costs.
 Bid variable for the project is considered to be the Bid Project Cost and O&M Cost (for first
year) as determined by various bidders at the time of bidding.
 40% of Bid Project Cost as bid by the Concessionaire adjusted to price index multiple will be
payable to the Concessionaire by the Authority in five equal instalments during construction
period. Remaining 60% of the same will be payable over next 15 years of operation period along
with applicable interest and O&M support.
 An interest component is considered to be payable to the concessionaire at the rate of Bank
Rate (6.75%) plus 3% on outstanding balance of the Completion Cost after payment of annuity
every six months till the end of concession period. Such interest amount is payable along with
every biannual instalment of annuity payment as per the provisions of Model Concession
Agreement.
 Operation & Maintenance Cost, Depreciation, Taxation: As assumed in the base case analysis,
earlier.
Total Project Cost (TPC) Calculation
These assumptions taken as per MORT&H Circular dated 10th August 2016. The Total Project Cost is
calculated in below table:
Table 11-25: HAM – TPC Calculation (Package 2)

1 Civil Construction cost 171.95
2 Escalation 16.37
3 Contingency expenses @ 1% Total civil cost 1.72


4 Total EPC cost (1+2+3) 190.04
5 IDC 7.366
6 IC/Pre-Operative Expenses 1.78
7 Financing Charges @1% of debt 0.68
8 Centages over EPC Cost (5+6+7) 9.83
Estimated Project Cost (4+8) 209.70
The Bidding parameter consists of two parameters:

c. Bid Project Cost (BPC) and
d. O &M payment for the 1st year
Bids would be evaluated on the basis of the lowest assessed Bid Price (the “Bid Price”). The Bid Price
shall be summation of (a) Net Present Value (NPV) of Bid Project Cost during the Concession Period and
(b) NPV of O&M cost (the “O&M Cost”) during the O&M Period, required by a Bidder for implementing
the Project and shall be paid as per the provisions of Article 23 of the Concession Agreement. For a
project to be financially viable the Equity IRR should be a minimum of 15%.
Conclusion
To achieve a target IRR of 15%, following is the optimal combination of Bid Project Cost and First Year
O&M Quote:
Table 11-26: HAM Financial Analysis Results (Package 2)
HAM Financial
Bid Project Cost 294.47 INR Cr
First year O&M Cost 6.32 INR Cr
NPV of (Bid Project Cost + First Year O&M Cost) 300.79 INR Cr
E-IRR 11.62 %
P-IRR 15.00 %
*The results are obtained after carrying out simulations (varying the bid project cost and the first year
O&M quote. It may be noted that any variation in the above mentioned assumptions or the structure of
the project, the results may vary significantly). The O&M Cost has been fixed so as to match the profile
of O&M expenditures over the year.
The Bidding Variables have been set as following in order to achieve the same. Simulations have been
carried out in order to achieve the minimum NPV of Bid Project Cost and O&M Cost. A bidder can play
with the above two parameters and still get the same NPV.

Table 11-27: Profit & Loss Statement – HAM Case (Package 2)
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
Revenue 16.86 34.81 36.18 37.82 39.45 41.01 42.67 44.14 45.97 47.83 49.92 52.32 55.11 58.36 62.28 32.69
Annuity 0.44 1.79 3.01 4.63 6.37 8.20 10.30 12.39 15.05 17.98 21.43 25.53 30.42 36.26 43.38 24.66
Interest 12.77 25.43 25.20 24.83 24.29 23.58 22.68 21.57 20.24 18.63 16.71 14.43 11.71 8.46 4.59 0.61
O&M
3.66 7.59 7.97 8.37 8.79 9.22 9.69 10.17 10.68 11.21 11.78 12.37 12.98 13.63 14.32 7.43
Payments
Operating
9.1 12.7 12.9 13.2 13.5 15.6 15.9 16.3 16.7 17.1 19.7 20.2 20.6 21.1 21.6 6.3
Expenses
Routine 1.2 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.7 4.9 2.7
MMR Cost 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 8.1 8.1 8.1 8.1 8.1 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 0.0
Other
(Lighting, 1.7 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.7 5.9 6.2 6.5 3.6
insurance, misc.)
PBITDA 7.72 22.16 23.25 24.60 25.92 25.41 26.73 27.84 29.29 30.75 30.19 32.15 34.47 37.23 40.64 26.37
less Book
Amortization 8.23 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 22.70 12.06
amount
PBIT (0.51) (0.54) 0.55 1.90 3.22 2.72 4.03 5.14 6.60 8.05 7.49 9.46 11.78 14.54 17.94 14.30
less Interest on
5.41 11.47 10.37 9.11 7.86 6.60 5.34 4.09 2.83 1.57 0.35 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Senior Loan
PBT (5.91) (12.01) (9.82) (7.21) (4.63) (3.88) (1.31) 1.06 3.77 6.48 7.14 9.46 11.78 14.54 17.94 14.30
less Taxes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.80 1.38 2.57 6.01 7.00 8.09 9.34 6.47
PAT (5.91) (12.01) (9.82) (7.21) (4.63) (3.88) (1.31) 0.83 2.97 5.10 4.58 3.45 4.77 6.44 8.60 7.84

Construction Support, Annuity, Interest and O&M Payments
Table 11-28: HAM Pay-out – Construction Support (Package 2)
Payment milestone Price index Construction support

1st 210 33.7
2nd 215 34.5
3rd 218 35.0
4th 221 35.4
5th 223 35.8
Total 174.3
Table 11-29: HAM Year-wise Pay-outs – Annuity, Interest and O&M (Package 2)
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
Annuity 0.44 1.79 3.01 4.63 6.37 8.20 10.30 12.39 15.05 17.98 21.43 25.53 30.42 36.26 43.38 24.66
Interest 12.77 25.43 25.20 24.83 24.29 23.58 22.68 21.57 20.24 18.63 16.71 14.43 11.71 8.46 4.59 0.61
O&M 3.66 7.59 7.97 8.37 8.79 9.22 9.69 10.17 10.68 11.21 11.78 12.37 12.98 13.63 14.32 7.43
Total 16.86 34.81 36.18 37.82 39.45 41.01 42.67 44.14 45.97 47.83 49.92 52.32 55.11 58.36 62.28 32.69
Table 11-30: Summary of all payments in HAM (Package 2)
HAM Pay-outs - Summary

Construction Support 174.30
Annuity 261.83
Interest 275.75
O&M Payments 159.84
Sum Total 871.71

12 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The project road is one of the most recently declared National Highways by MORT&H, in the State of
Rajasthan, The project road is declared as a National Highway in January 2013.
The project road (NH-158), before converting National Highway comprises of SH-39 (Ras to Beawar),
Shree Cement Road, part of NH-8 (near Beawar), MDR-84 (Rajiyawas - Sareri) and SH-61 (Sareri -
Mandal).
Project road starts from Ras and ends near Mandal connecting to NH-79. The existing length of project
road is 134.0 kms, including overlapping sections of NH-8. The project road is traversing through built-
up areas Ras, Beawar, Asind, Badnor and Mandal. The project road plays vital role in providing
connectivity to Cement Industries set-up around RAS to NH-8. The design length of project road is
116.745 km, excluding the overlapping sections for connectivity such as NH-14 bypass, NH-8 and NH-
148D.The Civil cost and Total Project cost worked out as 294.47 crores respectively. .
Project EIRR is well above 12%, hence the project is economically viable and strongly recommended for
up gradation to two lane with paved shoulders.
Based on the financial analysis, it is inferred that the Equity IRR for the project is not achieving the
desired benchmark of 15%.The project is not viable on PPP (Toll) mode of implementation at maximum
allowed grant of 40%, as equity IRR and Project IRR worked out as 5.35% for Package-II respectively.
Considering the Social and Economical benefits due to proposed improvements, it is recommended to
implement under EPC mode of Contract.

ANNEXURE-III
GEO-TECHNICAL
INVESTIGATION
REPORT
Project:
Geotechnical Investigation report for feasibility
study of NH-158 from Ras to Mandal in the State of
Rajasthan
Project Ref.:16093164
Sept. - 2016
Report submitted to:

M/s Feedback Infra Private limited
15th Floor, Tower – 9B,
DLF Cyber City Phase – III, Gurgaon (Haryana)
CONSULTANT
(Project Ref.-16093164)
CONTENTS
Page No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description 1
1.2 Object of Investigations 1
1.3 Scope of Investigations 2
1.4 Organization of Report 2
2.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE

2.1 Location 4
2.2 Physiography and Climate 4
2.3 General Geology 4
2.4 Seismicity 5
3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS

3.1 Introduction 6
3.2 Subsurface Exploration 6
3.3 Standard Penetration Test 6
3.4 Drilling in Rock 7
3.5 Ground Water Conditions 7
4.0 LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS

4.1 Bulk Density and Natural Moisture Content 8
4.2 Grain Size Analysis 8
4.3 Atterberg Limits 8
4.4 Specific Gravity 8
4.5 Direct Shear Test 9
4.6 Triaxial Shear Test 9
4.7 Consolidation Test 9
4.8 Laboratory Test on Rock 10
5.0 FINDINGS OF INVESTIGATIONS 11-12
6.0 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS

6.1 Foundation Type 13
6.2 Shallow Foundation 13
6.3 Deep Foundation 13
6.4 Assessment of Liquefaction 13
6.5 Selection of Foundation 13
6.6 Depth of Foundation In Rock 14
6.7 Allowable Bearing Capacity of Foundations on Rock 14
6.8 Allowable Bearing Capacity of Foundations in soil 18
7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 19-20
Geo-technical Investigation Report for feasibility study of NH-158 from Ras to Mandal in the State of Rajasthan
ANNEXURES
(Major Bridge at Chainage – 1+443)
Details of Bore hole ‘BH-1’
Table – 1 Bore Log Page – 21
Table – 2 Summary of Laboratory Test Results Page – 22
Fig. - 1 Grain Size Analysis: ‘Particle Size Distribution Curve’ Page – 23
Fig. - 2 Variation of SPT values ‘N’ with ‘Depth’ Page – 24
Annexure A-1 Bearing Capacity Calculation for open foundations on rock Page-25-26
(Minor Bridge at Chainage – 13+374)


(ROB at Chainage – 26+556)

Annexure A-4 Load Carrying Capacity Calculations for Pile Page-43-46






Annexure - B List of referred IS Codes Page – 83-84
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description

M/s Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd., 15th Floor, Tower – 9B, DLF Cyber City
Phase-III, Gurgaon has been assigned the work of feasibility study of
NH-158 from Ras to Mandal in the state of Rajasthan.
The client has appointed us to carry out the geotechnical investigation work
for the design of suitable foundation system for the proposed construction of
various structures along this stretch. We have carried out the investigations
and testing accordingly and our report for two major bridge, one minor bridge
and two ROB structures is submitted below.
S. No. Type of structure Design Chainage
1 Major Bridge 1+443
2 Minor Bridge 13+374
4 ROB 26+556
1.2 Object of Investigations
To establish the parameters for the foundation design of the structure,
various properties and parameters regarding the subsoil at site are required.
These parameters are achieved through geo-technical investigations viz. soil
profile, engineering properties & physical characteristics of the soil strata,
variation in strength of soil strata etc. and can be elaborated as below:
 Sub-surface conditions which will reflect the thickness of the different soil
strata
 Depth of ground water table
 Safe bearing capacity of the soil which will need the determination of
various engineering properties of the soil strata at different levels
 Depth of the foundations
 Suitable type of foundations
 Requirement of any treatment needed to enhance the engineering
properties of the soil beneath the footing
Page-1
1.3 Scope of Investigations

For achieving the aforesaid objectives, the scope of work, as finalized by the
consultant includes:
1. Making bore holes upto the given depth below existing ground level or 3m
in hard rock after refusal whichever is encountered earlier on the site at
each location as per the schedule given below.
Type of No. of Bore Depth of Bore
S. No. Design Chainage
Structure Holes Hole
1 Major Bridge 1+443 1 15 m
2 Minor Bridge 13+374 1 10 m
4 ROB 26+556 1 20 m
2. Conducting Standard Penetration Tests (S. P. T.) at 1.5 m depth interval.

3. Extracting disturbed & undisturbed soil sample at different depth interval.
4. Observing ground water table after a stabilization period of 24 hours.
5. Conducting laboratory tests on disturbed and undisturbed soil samples
and rock cores or pieces obtained after drilling collected during the
subsurface exploration.
6. Compiling and submitting report in five copies, containing field and
laboratory tests results and suggestion & recommendations regarding type
& depth of foundations and allowable load bearing capacity of soil and
other desired parameters at various depths.
1.4 Organization of Report
This report has been primarily designed to explain the whole study in a
systematic way, keeping in view the various demands of designers as well as
the client. Each investigation is backed by its theoretical base and the results
obtained either during the field tests or in laboratory are presented herein this
report in self-explanatory tabular and/or graphical form. Calculations are
shown wherever necessary before incorporating any parameter in the
recommendations.
Page-2
The chapter ‘Introduction’ describes the details of the project and various
contents of this study. ‘Site Reconnaissance’ provides the general
information regarding the site conditions, weather of the region, topography
and the geology of the area. Details of various field and laboratory tests are
given in the following two chapters. Findings obtained during these tests are
summarized in the next chapter.
‘Foundation Analysis’ is an important chapter dealing with all design
calculations required for the foundation selection and design.
Recommendations are finalized in the concluding chapter.
Various table, figures and graphs are given in the appendices in quite an
explanatory mode.
A list of Indian Standard (IS) Codes, which are referred throughout the study,
is also attached at the end of this report.
Page-3
2.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE
2.1 Location
Ras is a Village in Jaitaran Tehsil in Pali District of Rajasthan State, India. It
belongs to Jodhpur Division and Mandal is a Town in Mandal Tehsil in
Bhilwara District of Rajasthan State, India. It belongs to Ajmer Division.
The site investigated is at different chainages along NH-158 from Ras in Pali
district (Jodhpur Division) to Mandal in Bhilwara district (Ajmer Division) of
Rajasthan.
2.2 Physiography and Climate
The average annual rainfall in the investigation area is about 635 mm. Almost
95% of the total rainfall is received during the southwest monsoon, which
generally comes in the last week of June and withdraws in the middle of
September.
January is the coldest month with mean maximum and minimum
temperatures being lowest at 22.20 C & 7.30 C. Temperature is summer
month of June reaches up to 460 C. There is drop in temperature due to
onset of monsoon and rises again in the month of September.
2.2 General Geology & Hydrogeology
The area under investigation lies in both Bhilwara district and Pali district of
Rajasthan and the investigation stretch is along NH-158.
Predominant geological formations in the investigation area are mainly rocks
belonging to Bhilwara Supergroup, Aravallis & Vindhyan Supergroup.
Bhilwara supergoup mainly consists of Calc-schist, gneisses, banded
magnetite – quartzite, dolomitic marble, quartzite, garnet – mica schist, and
ambhibolites.
Aravalli Supergroup mainly consists of Quartzite, dolomite, marble, biotite
schist, quartz-biotite gneiss, migmatites, amphibolites.
Vindhyan Supergroup mainly consists of Shale, sandstone and limestone.
Hydrogeology:
Major water bearing formations are gneiss and schist (Bhilwara Supergroup);
gneiss, schist, phyllite slate and limestone (Aravalli Supergroup); sandstone,
shale and limestone (Vindhyan Supergroup) and alluvium. Ground water
occurs under unconfined to semi-confined condition. Weathered zone below
the water table acts as a good storage.
Page –4
Weathered gneiss forms upper part of the bedrock in the investigation area.
Weathered gneiss with schist occupies most of the investigation area under
thin cover of alluvium. In schists, phyllites and slates, weathered zone
extends to depth greater than in granites and gneisses. Muscovite schist
often grades into gneiss.
2.3 Seismicity
The investigation area lies in Low Damage Risk Zone (Zone-II) and is the
least seismically active region.
There is no recent earthquake observed in the investigation area except

Jaisalmer earthquake (550 kms away from the site stretch) which had a
magnitude of 5.1 and was felt in a large part of the region along the India-
Pakistan border. The earthquake was centered 2 kms of Mokal (27 kms NW
of Jaisalmer) 166 kms NNW of Barmer.
Page –5
3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION
3.1 Introduction
For achieving various soil parameters, Field Investigations are carried out at
site. Field Investigation comprises site reconnaissance, detailed exploration
including extensive boring program and conducting specified field tests viz.
Standard Penetration Test.
3.2 Subsurface Exploration
Subsurface Exploration was carried out at locations specified by the
consultant as per the following schedule:
S. Type of structure / No. of Depth BH No RL of BH Scouring Date of Date of
No. Design Ch. BH Top (m) Depth start Finish
1 Major Bridge/1+443 1 15 m BH-1 NA - 16-09-2016 19-09-2016
2 Minor Bridge/13+374 1 10 m BH-1 NA - 27-09-2016 28-09-2016
4 ROB/26+556 1 20 m BH-1 NA - 23-09-2016 24-09-2016
5 Minor Bridge/29+644 1 3m BH-1 NA - 25-09-2016 25-09-2016
6 Minor Bridge/46+072 1 5m BH-1 NA - 29-09-2016 30-09-2016
7 Major Bridge/71+760 1 6m BH-1 NA - 30-09-2016 01-10-2016
10 Major Bridge/92+554 1 15 m BH-1 NA - 05-10-2016 06-10-2016
The depth of these boreholes was taken from the existing ground surface.
Disturbed and undisturbed samples were collected from these boreholes at
various depths.
3.3 Standard Penetration Test
Standard Penetration Test conducted by means of the split spoon sampler
furnishes data about resistance of the soils to penetration, which can be used
to evaluate standard strength data, such as N values (number of blows per
30 cm of penetration using standard split spoon) of the soil.
Standard Penetration Tests were conducted in the boreholes at 1.5 m interval
as per the provisions of IS 2131:1981. The tests were conducted by means of
the split spoon sampler conforming to IS 9640:1980.
N values have been also utilized to establish the final shear parameters.
Page-6
3.4 Drilling in Rock

For drilling in rock, rock drilling rig was installed at the specified bore hole
location. Stability of rig was insured by making level ground. Drilling was
advanced by rotary core drilling method using double tube core barrels as per
the guidelines of IS: 6926-1996.
The rock core samples are preserved and stored in wooden core boxes as
specified in IS: 4078-1980.
3.5 Ground Water Conditions
Water Table was found at different depths at different borehole locations.
Specific values are given in the findings.
Page –7
4.0 LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
The laboratory tests to determine the physical properties, the engineering

properties and the engineering characteristics of the soil were conducted in
accordance with IS 2720. The tests performed are as follows.
4.1 Bulk Density and Natural Moisture Content
Undisturbed samples were collected from the boreholes in thin wall steel
sample tubes by taking the dimensions and weight of these sample tubes,
the bulk density of the soil is determined. Moisture content of the soil has
been calculated by Oven Drying Method.
4.2 Grain Size Analysis
The grain size analysis has been carried out utilizing both sieve and
hydrometer analysis. The sieve analysis was carried out by wet sieving
method in which the material was first washed through a 4.75 mm test sieve
nested in a 75 m test sieve. The soils retained in the sieves were then dried
in an oven. The dried soils were then sieved by dry sieving by passing the
soils through a series of square mesh sieves, which become progressively
finer down to 75 m mesh. Each fraction thus collected was then weighed and
the percentage retained on each sieve was calculated by dividing individual
weights by the total sample weight.
The soils passing through 75 m mesh was analyzed by sedimentation using
hydrometer method which involves measuring the rate of settlement of fine
particles suspended in a solution. Utilizing the principle of Stokes’ law,
particle size can be directly related to its rate of settlement in a fluid such as
water. From this process, the particle diameter and percentage finer is
calculated.
4.3 Atterberg Limits
Atterberg Limits in the form of liquid limit, plastic limit and shrinkage limit are
determined for the soil to establish its consistency. In the case of
cohesionless soil, plastic limit is first determined and if it cannot be
determined the soil sample is reported to be non-plastic.
4.4 Specific Gravity
The sample is dried overnight in an oven at 110° C, cooled in desiccators,
grind and sieved through 425μ IS Sieve. About 10gm of sieved sample is
taken in a specific gravity bottle and sufficient distilled water is added to just
cover the soil and left it for soaking for 10-15 minutes after which it is shaken
well and more distilled water added to fill the bottle about half. It is then
placed in a sand bath to de-air. After air is totally removed, it is cooled and
fills completely with water.
Page –8
Various weights, e.g. , weight of empty bottle, weight of bottle filled with
water, weight of bottle filled with water and sample, etc are taken from which
specific gravity is calculated.
4.5 Direct Shear Test
Direct Shear Test is a strength test, which is performed on the soil sample to
determine the value of angle of internal friction. The direct shear test is
generally conducted on cohesionless soil as consolidated drained (CD) test.
4.6 Triaxial Shear Test
Triaxial Shear Test is a strength test, which is performed on the soil sample
to determine the value of cohesion and angle of internal friction. In the
present case, test samples were prepared from undisturbed samples and
were tested in the Triaxial Apparatus with un-drained / drained condition and
un-consolidated / consolidated condition simulating the actual site conditions.
UU test is performed as a set of three single stage tests. The test is
performed on clayey soils. Three specimens were taken from a single
undisturbed sample. The soil specimens were trimmed and cut until the
length to diameter ratio is approximately two. The specimens were then
weighed, measured and placed in a tri-axial cell and were sheared under un-
drained conditions at a constant cell pressure and strain rate. Axial load and
displacement were recorded at regular intervals until a maximum deviator
stress, or 20% of strain, is reached. Cell pressures of 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 kg/cm2
have been used for three specimens.
CU & CD test were performed as a set of three single stage tests. Three
specimens were taken from a single undisturbed sample wherever possible,
otherwise remolding of samples were done under SMC. The soil specimens
were trimmed and cut until the length to diameter ratio is approximately two.
The specimens were then weighed, measured and placed in a tri-axial cell
and left for saturation. After the saturation is completed the sample is left for
consolidation under the desired cell pressure and then were sheared under
un-drained (for CU test) / drained (for CD test) conditions at a strain rate
depending on type of test. During shearing, axial load and displacement
along with pore water pressure in CU Test and burette reading in CD Test
were recorded at regular intervals until a maximum deviator stress, or 20% of
strain, is reached. Cell pressures of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 kg/cm2 for sample upto 15m
depth and 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 kg/cm2 for sample above 15m depth have been
used for three specimens.
4.7 Consolidation Test
Consolidation Test is conducted on clayey soil with an apparatus known as
consolidometer. The test is performed on the soil sample to determine the
values of void ratio, coefficient of volume change and coefficient of
consolidation.
Page –9
4.8 Laboratory Test on Rock

Unconfined compression / point load strength index, water absorption and
unit weight tests were conducted on rock wherever cores are available.
Where RQD obtained is nil to poor, point load strength index test, otherwise
unconfined compression test / direct shear test on residual soil obtained
during drilling have been conducted on selected rock cores/ rock materials.
Summary of Laboratory Tests results for all boreholes is shown in tabular
form and the same is presented in the appendices of this report.
Page –10
5.0 FINDINGS OF INVESTIGATIONS
Based on various field and laboratory tests, following findings are observed:
1. The general pattern of sub surface strata in the bore-holes has been observed
as following:
RQD (%)
TCR (%)
Structure / Depth
(MPa)
U.C.S.
(t/m2)
RMR
BH No. Description of Strata 
c
Chainage below EGL
Major Bridge / 0.0-3.0 Fine Sand with Gravel (SP) - - - - 0 32

BH-1
1+443 3.0-15.0 Slightly Weathered Banded Gneiss 51 36 35 63 - -
Minor Bridge / 0.0-5.0 Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) - - - - 0 31
BH-1
13+374 5.0-10.0 Moderate to Highly Weathered Quartzite 16 6 25 50 - -
Minor Bridge /
BH-1 0.0-10.0 Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) - - - - 0 30
16+488
0.0-2.0 Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) - - - - 0 30
2.0-8.0 Highly Weathered Mica Schist 8 0 10 - - -
ROB / 26+556 BH-1
8.0-15.5 Mica Schist with Sandstone 17 6 15 35 - -
15.5-20.0 Sandstone 49 25 35 62 - -
Minor Bridge /
BH-1 0.0-3.0 Mica Schist 84 84 55 45 - -
29+644
Minor Bridge /
BH-1 0.0-5.0 Mica Schist with Sandstone 54 43 35 45 - -
46+072
Major Bridge / 0.0-1.5 Completely Weathered Rock 0 0 - - - -
BH-1
71+760 1.5-6.0 Marble with Mica Schist 49 27 35 67 - -
Minor Bridge / 0.0-4.0 Fine Sand with Gravel (SP) - - - - 0 31
BH-1
89+308 4.0-10.0 Completely Weathered Rock 0 0 0 - 0 31
0.0-4.0 Fine Sand with Gravel (SP) - - - - 0 31
Minor Bridge /
BH-1 4.0-13.0 Highly Weathered Sandstone 8 0 10 46 - -
89+830
13.0-15.0 Moderately Weathered Sandstone 30 12 25 58 - -
Major Bridge / 0.0-3.0 Completely Weathered Rock 0 0 - - - -
BH-1
92+554 3.0-15.0 Moderately Weathered Sandstone 30 16 25 53 - -
2. The physical properties of sub surface strata in the bore-holes of various sites
has been observed as following:
Depth below Specific Density Water
Structure / Chainage BH No.
EGL Gravity (gm/cc) Absorption (%)
0.00-3.00 2.65 1.71 11.25
Major Bridge / 1+443 BH-1
0.3-15.00 2.71 2.45 1.52
0.00-5.00 2.66 1.72 10.15
Minor Bridge / 13+374 BH-1
5.00-10.00 2.69 2.42 2.11
Minor Bridge / 16+488 BH-1 0.00-10.00 2.66 1.70 9.45
0.00-2.00 2.66 1.71 9.41
2.00-8.00 2.69 2.28 3.17
ROB / 26+556 BH-1
8.00-15.50 2.69 2.30 3.14
15.50-20.00 2.71 2.49 2.89
Page –11
Depth below Specific Density Water

Structure / Chainage BH No.
EGL Gravity (gm/cc) Absorption (%)
Minor Bridge / 29+644 BH-1 0.00-3.00 2.71 2.40 2.35
Minor Bridge / 46+072 BH-1 0.00-5.00 2.70 2.40 2.57
0.00-1.50 - - -
1.50-6.00 2.72 2.46 2.50
0.00-4.00 2.65 1.70 9.89
Minor Bridge / 89+308 BH-1
4.00-10.00 - - -
0.00-4.00 2.65 1.69 10.13
Minor Bridge / 89+830 BH-1 4.00-13.00 2.69 2.34 2.63
13.00-15.00 2.70 2.47 2.07
0.00-3.00 - - -
3.00-15.00 2.71 2.44 2.31
Inference of Findings:
The engineering properties of the sub surface strata at different depth for various
structures on the basis of sub surface investigation and testing can be taken as
following:
Properties of soil / Rock
Founding material in case of highly
Structure / Description of foundation Design RMR RMR
level weathered rock
Chainage bearing material / SPT value Class. No.
below EGL Cohesion Angle of Internal
c in t/m2 Friction 
Major
2.0 m Fine sand with gravel 20 - 0 31
Bridge/1+443
Minor
2.0 m Silty sand with gravel 20 - 0 31
Bridge/13+374
Minor
2.0 m Silty sand with gravel 20 - 0 30
Bridge/16+488
Highly weathered mica
ROB/26+556 3.0 m
schist
15 V 0 35
Minor
1.50 m Mica schist 55 III 0 35
Bridge/29+644
Minor Mica schist with
1.5 m 35 IV 0 34
Bridge/46+072 sandstone
Major Bridge /
3.0 m Marble with mica schist 35 IV 0 34
71+760
Minor
Bridge/89+308
Minor
Bridge/89+830
Major Bridge / Moderately weathered
3.0 m 25 IV 0 33
92+554 sandstone
Page -12
6.0 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS
6.1 Foundation Type

A Foundation is required for distributing the loads of the superstructure on a
larger ground area. The dead and live load of the proposed structure are to
be transferred to the underlying supporting soil through suitable foundation.
Foundation may be broadly classified into two categories:
i) Shallow Foundation and ii) Deep Foundation.
6.2 Shallow Foundation
Shallow foundation transmits the loads to the strata at shallow depth. A
shallow foundation is one the width of which is greater than its depth. Shallow
Foundations are located just below the lowest part of the wall or a column,
which they support.
6.3 Deep Foundation
When the soil at or near the ground surface is not capable of supporting a
structure, deep foundations are required to transfer the loads to deeper
strata. Deep foundations are, therefore, used when surface soil is unsuitable
for shallow foundation, and a firm stratum is so deep that it cannot be
reached economically by shallow foundations. The most common types of
deep foundations are piles, wells and caissons.
6.4 Assessment of Liquefaction
Liquefaction is the sudden loss of shear strength of the loose fine-grained
sands due to earthquake-induced vibration under saturated conditions.
Liquefaction generally takes place in loose fine-grained sands (fines < 10 %,
D60, 0.20 mm to 1.0 mm and Cu between 2 to 5) with N value less than 15. In
case of soil strata having N>15, liquefaction of soil will not take place
normally.
The present site falls in seismic zone – II. Considering the history of past
earthquakes and available seismic data, it can be assumed that the area
under consideration will not be affected by any seismic activity since the area
is very low seismic active.
6.5 Selection of Foundation
Selection of suitable type of foundation for the proposed structure depends
upon the (i) intensity & type of loading to be transferred from the
superstructure and (ii) the properties & behavior of sub soil.
Page –13
In the present case, the structure is of major bridge, minor bridge and ROB
which is likely to transfer moderate load on the bearing strata of soil / rock.
For the prevailing ground conditions and type of structures, open foundations
shall be adopted.
6.6 Depth of foundation In Rock
The founding levels should be fixed considering an embedment of at least
1.50 m in to the disintegrated / weathered soft rock and 0.50m into the sound
hard rock.
As per clause 5.4.4 of IS 13063: 1991: In case of rock of very low strength,
highly weathered rocks, the depth of foundation shall be decided in
accordance with provisions of IS 1904 : 1986, considering the foundation
material to be as soil.
As per clause 5.4.3 of IS 13063: 1991: In case of jointed, sheared and partially
weathered rocks, the base of the foundation shall be kept at least 50cm inside
the rock surface so that the upper portion of highly weathered rock mass is
avoided.
6.7 Allowable Bearing Capacity of Foundations on Rock
Analysis for allowable bearing capacity on rock has been done by the following
three methods as per IS:12070.
a) Based on rock mass rating (RMR value) using the Table – 3 given in
IS: 12070.
b) Based on classification using the Table – 2 given in IS: 12070
c) Based on international practice as recommended by The American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
a) Analysis of Safe Bearing Pressure from the RMR System
Analysis has been carried out using the RMR also known as Geo-mechanics
classification by considering various parameters such as uniaxial compressive
strength, RQD, spacing and condition of discontinuities and ground water
condition. The correlation between the RMR value and allowable pressure has
been given in Table –3 IS: 12070. This will ensure settlement of raft foundation
to be less than 12 mm.
Rock Mass Rating (RMR) of jointed rock masses, may be worked out based
on IS 13365 (part I). Rock Mass Rating parameters are reproduced from
annex B of IS 13365 (part I) below for ready reference.
Page -14
Strength of intact rock material (mpa)

Compressive Rating Basis
Description
Strength (M Pa)
Exceptionally Strong >250 15 UCS value data of
Very Strong 100-250 12 specific borehole
Strong 50-100 7 from laboratory test
Average 25-50 4 is used in RMR
Weak 10-25 2
Very Weak 2-10 1
Extremely Weak <2 0
Rock quality designation (RQD)
Description RQD (%) Rating Basis
Excellent 90-100 20 RQD values of specific borehole
Good 75-90 17 below given depth from relevant
Fair 50-75 13 borehole is used in RMR
Poor 25-50 8
Very Poor <25 3
Spacing of discontinuities
Description Spacing, Rating Basis
Very Wide (m)
>2 20 Spacing of discontinuities of
Wide 0.6-2 15 specific borehole from field
Moderate 0.2-0.6 10 observations is used in RMR
Close 0.06-0.2 8
Very Close <0.06 5
Condition of discontinuities
Very rough rough and slightly rough Slickensided wall 5 mm thick
and slightly and moderately rock surface or 1- soft gauge 5
unweathered weathered wall to highly 5 mm thick gauge mm wide
rock wall rock, rock surface, weathered wall or 1-5 mm wide continuous
tight and separation < 1 rock surface, opening, discontinuity
discontinuous, mm separation < 1 continuous
no separation mm discontinuity
30 25 20 10 0
Ground water condition
General Description Completely Dry Damp Wet Dripping Flowing
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
Rating Adjustment For Discontinuity Orientations
Strike and Dip Orientations of Very Very
Favorable Fair Unfavorable
Discontinuities Fav. Unfav.
Tunnels and mines 0 -2 -5 -10 -12
Ratings Foundations 0 -2 -7 -15 -25
Slopes 0 -5 -25 -50 -60
Page -15
Table 3 of IS-12070, Design & Construction of Shallow Foundation on Rock,

gives net allowable pressure based on RMR values. These values will ensure
settlement of foundation to be less than 12 mm. This table is reproduced
below.
Net Safe Bearing Pressure Based On RMR
Classification No I II III IV V
Description of Rock Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor
RMR 100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 20-0
Q ns (T/m2) 600-448 448-288 280-151 145-90-58 55-45-40
The RMR for use in Table 3 as per IS: 12070 should be the average within a
depth below foundation level equal to the width of foundation, provided the
RMR is fairly uniform within the depth. If the upper part of the rock, within a
depth of about one fourth of the width of foundation, is of lower quality the
value of this part should be used or the inferior rock should be removed. Since
these values are based on limiting the settlement, they should not be
increased if the foundation is embedded into the rock.
RMR value for highly fractured rock is also determined based on experience
as Joints are not very clearly defined.
b) Estimation Of Safe Bearing Pressure From Classification Table
The classification of rock mass for assessing safe bearing pressure is listed in
table – 2 as reproduced below;
Net safe bearing
Material
pressure (t/m2)
Massive crystalline bedrock including granite, diorite, gneiss, 1000
trap rock
Foliated rocks such as schist or slate in sound condition 400
Bedded limestone in sound condition 400
Sedimentary rock, including-hard shales and sandstones 250
Soft or broken bedrock ( excluding shale ), and soft limestone 100
Soft Shale 40
Page -16
Correction to be Applied
For getting the allowable bearing pressure the safe bearing pressure
obtained from 6.7 a and 6.7 b shall be multiplied with the correction factors
according to the geological conditions as per IS: 12070 Clause 9.2.
For submerged conditions - correction factor of 0.50 to 0.75
depending upon the aperture of joints
For orientation of joints - Correction factor of 0.50 to 1.00
depending upon the orientation of joints
These correction factors are not applicable for bearing pressure evaluated
from RMR system.
c) International Practice
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) recommends calculating the
bearing capacity considering general shear failure with irregular failure surface
through rock mass. Based on the evaluated rock characteristics, parameters
may be selected for foundation analysis by using the following equation.
Qult = c*Nc*Cc + 0.5*B*N.C + D*Nq
Where
c = Cohesion intercept
 = Angle of internal friction of the rock mass
B = Width of foundation
D = Depth of foundation
 = effective unit weight of rock
Cc & C  Correction factors for foundation shape
Cc = 1.20 for circular and 1.25 for square foundation
C = 0.70 for circular and 0.85 for square foundation
Nc,Nq,N = bearing capacity factors which are a function of 

Nc = 2.N N
N = N N
Nq = N
N = tan2 45 + /2
Page -17
From the above mentioned guidelines and the finding from the investigation carried
out, the recommended allowable bearing capacity for the proposed construction of
structures viz., minor bridge, major bridge and ROB is as following:
q allowable (t/m2)
Structure Founding level Size of q allowable
/ Chainage below EGL foundation RMR Classification ASCE (t/m2)
method method method
ROB / 26+556 3.00 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 50 70 43.50 43.0
Minor Bridge / 29+644 1.50m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 175 150 34.67 34.0
Minor Bridge / 46+072 1.50 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 140 100 31.14 31.0
Major Bridge / 71+760 1.50 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 140 100 39.19 39.0
Major Bridge / 92+554 3.00 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 120 100 35.34 35.0
6.8 Allowable Bearing Capacity of Foundations in Soil

Bearing capacity of soil for foundation has been calculated in accordance with IS:
6403 –1981. Here Allowable bearing pressure has been evaluated by: (a) Shear
Failure criterion and (b) Settlement criterion taking SPT values and the minimum of
the two has been recommended as following.
Founding Level
Safe Bearing
Foundation
below EGL
Depth (m)
Safe Bearing capacity Rec. Bearing

/ Chainage
Structure
Size of Pressure
(t/m2) Capacity
Foundation (t/m2)
(Shear Criteria) (t/m2)
(Settlement criteria)
Major Bridge /
2.0 m 2.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 25.98 22.16 22.0
1+443
Minor Bridge /
2.0 m 2.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 25.98 22.16 22.0
13+374
Minor Bridge /
2.0 m 2.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 18.24 22.16 18.0
16+488
Minor Bridge /
2.0 m 2.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 25.98 22.16 22.0
89+308
Minor Bridge /
2.0 m 2.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 25.98 22.16 22.0
89+380
Calculation for the above has been given in the attached Annexure.
Page -18
7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
In view of the these findings & results obtained during the field and laboratory
investigations and the analysis carried out thereafter, following general recommendations
are being made for the foundation design of the proposed major bridges, minor bridge
and ROB structures at different locations along NH-158 from Ras to Mandal in the State
of Rajasthan.
1. The type of foundation depends upon the configuration of loading & loading
intensity as well as characteristics & behavior of subsoil. Considering the type
of loading and based on various findings of the investigations carried out, in
the present case, the type of foundation can be adopted as Isolated or raft
foundation.
2. The recommended allowable bearing pressure for the proposed construction
of structures are as following:
Founding level Size of q allowable

Structure / Chainage
below EGL foundation (t/m2)
Major Bridge/1+443 2.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 22.0

Minor Bridge/13+374 2.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 22.0

ROB/26+556 3.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 43.0
Major Bridge / 71+760 3.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 39.0

Major Bridge / 92+554 3.0 m 8.0m x 12.0m 35.00
3. The choice of the value for design is a matter of engineering judgment and field
assessment of rock character. After review of the net bearing pressure
computed from different methods, the final value has been selected based on
our engineering judgment based on rock encountered in the limited number of
boreholes as reported herein. If any significant departure from the reported
data is noticed during actual construction, the matter should be referred back
for advice.
Page –19
4. The engineer should inspect the excavation to ensure that any loose, soft
weathered rock or unsuitable materials has been removed and that foundation
bear on the natural rock at site. The rock surface should be roughened and
scarified so as to ensure a proper bond between rock and concrete.
For Explore Engineering Consultants Pvt. Ltd.
Date: 15/12/2016 (A.K.SINGH) (A.P.SINGH)

Place: Noida
Page –20
ANNEXURES
Major Bridge at
Design Chainage: 1+443
Details of BH - 1
Geotechnical Investigation Report for feasibilty study of NH-158, Ras Mandal , Rajasthan
FIELD BORELOG Table No.- 1

METHOD OF BORING : Shell & Auger Method BORE HOLE NO. :1
WATER TABLE : 0.5 m DATE START : 16-09-2016
DEPTH OF BORING : 15 m b.g.l DATE COMPLETION : 19-09-2016
SAMPLES DETAILS SPT TEST RESULTS
PENETRATION RATE (mm/min)

TOTAL CORE RECOVERY (%)
RETURN WATER COLOUR

LEVEL OF WATER TABLE
STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
DS 1 0.00-0.50 - NA
1.00
UDS 1 1.00-1.30 COLLECTED NA

FINE SAND WITH
SP 3.00 NA
GRAVEL
SPT 1 1.50-1.95 16 30 16 30 NA
2.00
3.00
1.50 3.00-4.50 NA 0 0 30 - Nx
4.00
5.00
1.50 4.50-6.00 NA 70 48 14 3,10,34 Nx
6.00
1.50 6.00-7.50 NA 30 10 18 2,5,15 Nx

7.00
0.50 m
8.00
1.50 7.50-9.00 NA 21 10 21 2,5,15 Nx

NX CORE
SLIGHTLY WEATHERED
BROWNISH
PARTIAL
9.00
BANDED -
GNEISS
1.50 9.00-10.50 NA 57 41 15 2,11,35 Nx

10.00
11.00
1.50 10.50-12.00 NA 70 51 13 2,8,15 Nx
12.00
13.00 1.50 12.00-13.50 NA 79 62 11 2,9,18 Nx
14.00
1.50 13.50-15.00 NA 81 69 12 2,20,38 Nx
15.00
Page - 21
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS OF BH-1 Table No.-2

GRAIN SIZE ATTERBERG SHEAR
MOISTURE CONTENT/WATER ABSORPTION (%)

ANALYSIS LIMIT PARAMETER
UCS / CRUSHING STRENGTH (MPa)
Coefficient of volume compressibility

FREE SWELLING INDEX (%)
BULK DENSITY in t/m3
DRY DENSITY in t/m3

TYPE / SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
ANGLE OF FRICTION (Degrees)

DEPTH BELOW GL
DESCRIPTION OF
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
VOID RATIO, e0
PLASTICITY INDEX (%)
WEIGHTED MEAN DIA. (mm)
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
LEGEND
STRATA
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)

LIQUID LIMIT (%)
SILT FACTOR
SAND (%)
100
CLAY (%)
SILT (%)
90
DS 0.00-0.50 4 86 10 0 0.84 1.62
1.00
UDS 1.00-1.30 FINE SAND 10 84 6 0 1.05 1.80 1.71 1.54 11.25 2.65 - 0.00 32 - 0.72 - 80
NON
WITH GRAVEL
PLASTIC
SPT 1.50-1.95 (SP) 5 87 8 0 0.79 1.56 34
2.00
70
3.00
4.00
3.00-4.50 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - - 60
PERCENT FINER
5.00
50
4.50-6.00 NA NA 2.46 2.42 1.65 2.71 - - - 65 - -
6.00
40
6.00-7.50 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
7.00
30
8.00
7.50-9.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
SLIGHTLY
20
NX CORE
9.00 WEATHERED
BANDED
GNEISS
9.00-10.50 NA NA 2.39 2.35 1.70 2.70 - - - 68 - -

10.00
10
11.00
10.50-12.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
0
12.00 0.001
13.00 12.00-13.50 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
14.00
13.50-15.00 NA NA 2.50 2.47 1.21 2.71 - - - 63 - -
15.00
Page - 22
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE for BH-1
0 10 20 3
100 0.00
90 1.50
80 3.00
70 4.50
60 6.00
PERCENT FINER
50 7.50
40 9.00
30 10.50
20 12.00
10 13.50
0 15.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
GRAIN SIZE IN mm OBSE
1.50 m depth
Depth Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%)
1.50 m depth 5 87 8 0
Fig. - 1
Page - 23
VARIATION OF SPT 'N' WITH DEPTH for BH-1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.00
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
7.50
9.00
10.50
12.00
13.50
15.00
1 10
IN mm OBSERVED CORRECTED
depth
Fig. - 2
Page - 24
Annexure-A1
Bearing Capacity Calculations
ANNEXURE-A1
Bearing Capacity calculations
( as per IS:6403-1981 )
Shear Failure Criterion :
1
qa = [ c Nc Sc dc ic + γ Df (Nq–1)Sq dq iq + 0.5 γBNγSγdγiγW’]
F
Here qa = Allowable Bearing Capacity
F = FOS ( taken equal to 3.0 as per IS: 1904 )
Water table correction factor W’ =0.5

Founding level below EGL = 2.00 m
Unit weight of soil γ (t/m3 ) = 1.70
Cohesion c(t/m2) = 0
Angle of internal friction = 31
 = 31  Nc =21.63 Nq =11.77 Ny =13.12
For a soil, if  is greater than 36, general shear failure is likely to occur. If  is less than 29, local
shear failure will be more probable. For intermediate values of  between 29 to 36, the values of
bearing capacity factors are obtained by interpolation.
Founding q safe
Depth of Type of Size of dq =
Level below Sc Sq Sy dc (t/m2)
Foundation Foundation Foundation dy
EGL
2.00 m 2.00 m Rectangular 8.0 m x 12.0 m 1.13 1.13 0.83 1.088 1.044 25.95
The values of bearing capacity factors Nc, Nq and N have been arrived at from
table 1 of IS: 6403-1981.
The depth factors dc, dq and d have been calculated as per clause 5.1.2.2 of
IS:6403-1981.
The Shape factors Sc, Sq, Sy have taken from clause 5.1.2.1 of IS: 6403-1981.
Settlement Criterion:
As per IS:8009-1976 Part-I- Clause-9.1.4, the settlement for different width has been
computed. For the allowable total settlement of 50mm for rectangualr footing (as per
IS:1904), the safe bearing pressure is computed and tabulated as following:
Page-25
Founding Level Size of SPT Settlement in mm for a pressure of 10 t/m2 Safe Bearing
below EGL Foundation N Pressure
Correction for
( t/m2 )
From Graph
Value (mm)
water table
Correction
Corrected
Rigidity
Factor
Factor
Depth
(mm)
2.00 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 20 15 0.50 0.80 0.94 22.56 22.16
Hence the values of safe bearing capacity as chosen the minimum value (rounded
off) from above two criterion are as following:
Founding Level Depth of Type of Size of Allowable bearing
Below EGL foundation Foundation Foundation capacity (t/m2)
2.00 m 2.00 m Rectangular 8.0 m x 12.0 m 22.00
Page-26
Minor Bridge at
Details of BH - 1
Geotechnical Investigation Report for NH-158, Ras Mandal Feasibility Study, Rajasthan


RETURN WATER COLOUR

STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
DS 1 0.00-0.50 - NA
1.00
SPT 1 1.50-1.95 11 30 11 16 NA
2.00
SILTY SAND
SM 5.00 NA
WITH GRAVEL
3.00
SPT 2 3.00-3.45 15 30 15 18 NA
4.00
SPT 3 4.50-4.95 20 30 20 22 NA
5.00
7.50 m
1.50 5.00-6.50 NA 7 7 26 3,4,11 Nx

6.00
7.00
MODERATE TO 1.50 6.50-8.00 NA 13 0 28 2,3,8 Nx

NX CORE
BROWNISH
HIGHLY WEATHERED - PARTIAL

QUARTZITE
8.00
1.50 8.00-9.50 NA 26 19 22 2,10,28 Nx

9.00
0.50 9.50-10.00 NA 20 0 30 3,5,7 Nx

10.00
Page - 27

UCS / ROCK CRUSHING STRENGTH (MPa)


DRY DENSITY in t/m3

TYPE / SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
SPECIFIC GRAVITY

DEPTH BELOW GL
DESCRIPTION OF
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
VOID RATIO, e0
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
LEGEND
STRATA
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)

LIQUID LIMIT (%)
SILT FACTOR
100
SAND (%)
CLAY (%)
SILT (%)
90
DS 0.00-0.50 2 53 45 0 0.38 1.08
80
1.00
UDS 1.00-1.30 3 64 33 0 0.46 1.20 1.70 1.55 9.89 2.66 - 0.00 31 - 0.72 -
SPT 1.50-1.95 7 75 18 0 0.92 1.69 32 70

2.00
SILTY SAND
NON
WITH GRAVEL
(SM)
PLASTIC 60
3.00
PERCENT FINER
SPT 3.00-3.45 2 84 14 0 0.57 1.33 32
50
4.00
UDS 4.00-4.30 5 78 17 0 0.76 1.53 1.73 1.57 10.41 2.66 - 0.00 31 - 0.70 -
40
SPT 4.50-4.95 11 76 13 0 1.25 1.97 33
5.00
30
5.00-6.50 NA NA 2.44 2.37 2.95 2.69 - - - 53 - -
6.00
20
7.00
6.50-8.00 MODERATE NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - - 10
NX CORE
TO HIGHLY
WEATHERED
QUARTZITE
8.00
0
0.001
8.00-9.50 NA NA 2.39 2.36 1.27 2.70 - - - 50 - -
9.00
1.50 m
9.50-10.00 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
10.00
Page - 28
0 10 20 30
100 0.00
90
1.50
80
70 3.00
60
4.50
PERCENT FINER
50
40 6.00
30
7.50
20
10 9.00
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
GRAIN SIZE IN mm
1.50 m depth 3.00 m depth 4.50 m depth
OBSERVE
1.50 m depth 7 75 18 0
3.00 m depth 2 84 14 0
4.50 m depth 11 76 13 0
Fig. - 1
Page - 29
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.00
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
7.50
9.00
0.1 1 10
SIZE IN mm
.00 m depth 4.50 m depth
OBSERVED CORRECTED
Fig. - 2
Page - 30
Annexure-A2
ANNEXURE-A2
( as per IS:6403-1981 )
1
F

 = 31  Nc =21.63 Nq =11.77 Ny =13.12
Founding q safe
EGL
table 1 of IS: 6403-1981.
IS:6403-1981.
Page-31
Correction for
( t/m2 )
From Graph
Value (mm)
water table
Correction
Corrected
Rigidity
Factor
Factor
Depth
(mm)
2.00 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 20 15 0.50 0.80 0.94 22.56 22.16
Page-32
Minor Bridge at
Details of BH - 1
Geotechnical Investigation Report for the Proposed IT Park Project 'Noida World One' at Plot No.- 1, Sector - 90, Noida (U.P)

CASING TYPE & DEPTH : SX-6,10m LOCATION : As per attached location plan
WATER TABLE : 5m DATE START : 21-09-2016
SAMPLES DETAILS SPT BLOWS COUNTS
SOIL CLASS.
TEST DEPTH (m)

DEPTH(m)
REMARKS
LEGEND
STRATA
DISCRIPTION OF
TYPE
THICK. (m)
NO.
SOIL STRATA 15 30 45 "N"
DS 1 0.00-0.50 COLLECTED 10
10
20
30
40
60
50
70
80
90
0
1.0
UDS 1 1.00-1.30 COLLECTED
SPT 1 1.50-1.95 3 3 4 7
2.0
3.0
SPT 2 3.00-3.45 4 4 6 10
4.0
UDS 2 4.00-4.30 COLLECTED
SILTY SAND
SM 10.00 SPT 3 4.50-4.95 5 8 11 19
5.0 WITH GRAVEL
6.0
SPT 4 6.00-6.45 5 7 13 20
7.0
UDS 3 7.00-7.30 SLIPPED
SPT 5 7.50-7.95 6 9 14 23
8.0
9.0
10.0 SPT 6 9.55-10.00 5 7 13 20
ABBREVIATION:- SPT - Standard Penetration Test UDS- Undisturbed Sample
Page - 33

SPT VALUE GRAIN SIZE ATTERBERG SHEAR
UCS / ROCK CRUSHING STRENGTH

'N' ANALYSIS LIMIT PARAMETER
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)

DRY DENSITY in t/m3

TYPE / SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
DEPTH BELOW GL
DESCRIPTION OF
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
VOID RATIO, e0
COHESION 'C' in t/m4
ANGLE of FRICTION
LEGEND
PLASTICITY INDEX
STRATA
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)

LIQUID LIMIT (%)
(MPa)
SILT + CLAY (%)
SILT FACTOR
CORRECTED
GRAVEL (%)
OBSERVED
SAND (%)
Clay
100
DS 0.00-0.50 COLLECTED 1 82 17 0.32 0.99

90
100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
1.0
80
UDS 1.00-1.30 COLLECTED 1 73 26 0.29 0.94 1.68 1.54 9.21 2.66 0.00 30 - 0.73 -
2.0
SPT 1.50-1.95 7 10 1 76 23 0.31 0.97 30 70
60
PERCENT FINER
3.0
SPT 3.00-3.45 10 12 4 83 13 0.56 1.31 31 50
4.0 40
UDS 4.00-4.30 COLLECTED 1 85 14 0.33 1.02 1.72 1.57 9.69 2.66 0.00 30 - 0.70 -
SILTY SAND
WITH NON
30
SPT 4.50-4.95 19 21 5 82 13 0.63 1.39 33
5.0 GRAVEL PLASTIC
(SM)
20
6.0
10
SPT 6.00-6.45 20 18 1 87 12 0.36 1.06 32
0
7.0
0.001
UDS 7.00-7.30 SLIPPED - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SPT 7.50-7.95 23 19 1 86 13 0.34 1.02 33 1.50 m depth 3.00

8.0
9.0
10.0 SPT 9.55-10.00 20 17 1 85 14 0.37 1.07 32
Page - 34
Clay Silt Sand Gravel

0 10 20 30 40
100 0.0
90
1.5
80
70 3.0
60
PERCENT FINER
4.5
50
40
6.0
30
20 7.5
10
9.0
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
GRAIN SIZE IN mm
OBSERVED
1.50 m depth 3.00 m depth 4.50 m depth 6.00 m depth 7.50 m depth 9.55 m depth
Depth Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt + Clay (%)

1.50 m depth 1 76 23
3.00 m depth 4 83 13
4.50 m depth 5 82 13
6.00 m depth 1 87 12
7.50 m depth 1 86 13
9.55 m depth 1 85 14
Fig. - 1
Page - 35
Sand Gravel
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.0
1.5
3.0
4.5
6.0
7.5
9.0
0.1 1 10
AIN SIZE IN mm
OBSERVED CORRECTED
epth 6.00 m depth 7.50 m depth 9.55 m depth
Fig. - 2
Page - 36
Annexure-A3
ANNEXURE-A3
( as per IS:6403-1981 )
1
F

 = 30  Nc =18.08 Nq =8.88 Ny =8.73
Founding q safe
EGL
table 1 of IS: 6403-1981.
IS:6403-1981.
Page-37
Correction for
( t/m2 )
From Graph
Value (mm)
water table
Correction
Corrected
Rigidity
Factor
Factor
Depth
(mm)
2.00 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 20 15 0.50 0.80 0.94 22.56 22.16
Page-38
ROB at
Details of BH - 1

WATER TABLE : 12 m DATE START : 23-09-2016

RETURN WATER COLOUR

STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
DS 1 0.00-0.50 - NA
1.00 SILTY SAND

SM 2.00 NA
WITH GRAVEL COLLECTED NA
UDS 1 1.00-1.30
2.00 SPT 1 1.50-1.95 13 30 13 20 NA
3.00 1.50 2.00-3.50 NA 5 0 35 2,2,2 Nx
4.00
1.50 3.50-5.00 NA 7 0 28 5,5,5 Nx
5.00 HIGHLTY WEATHERED

MICA SCHIST
6.00 1.50 5.00-6.50 NA 8 0 22 2,2,3 Nx
7.00
1.50 6.50-8.00 NA 12 0 20 2,3,4 Nx
8.00
COMPLETE
9.00 1.50 8.00-9.50 NA 11 0 18 2,3,4 Nx
10.00
12.00 m
1.50 9.50-11.00 NA 9 0 21 2,2,3 Nx

NX CORE
BROWNISH
11.00
-
MICA SCHIST
12.00 WITH 1.50 11.00-12.50 NA 13 0 16 2,3,5 Nx
SANDSTONE
13.00
1.50 12.50-14.00 NA 22 8 13 2,7,12 Nx
14.00
15.00 1.50 14.00-15.50 NA 30 7 14 3,6,10 Nx
16.00
1.50 15.50-17.00 NA 60 48 11 5,10,14 Nx
17.00
PARTIAL
18.00 SANDSTONE 1.50 17.00-18.50 NA 29 7 13 2,4,10 Nx
19.00
1.50 18.50-20.00 NA 58 20 12 2,5,10 Nx
20.00
Page - 39



DRY DENSITY in t/m3

TYPE / SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
SPECIFIC GRAVITY

DEPTH BELOW GL
DESCRIPTION OF
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
VOID RATIO, e0
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
LEGEND
STRATA
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)

LIQUID LIMIT (%)
SILT FACTOR
100
SAND (%)
CLAY (%)
SILT (%)
90
DS 0.00-0.50 2 62 36 0 0.45 1.18
1.00 SILTY SAND 80

WITH GRAVEL (SM)
UDS 1.00-1.30 3 55 42 0 0.45 1.18 24 20 4 1.71 1.56 9.41 2.66 - 0.00 30 - 0.70 -
2.00 SPT 1.50-1.95 2 64 34 0 0.45 1.18 33

70
3.00 2.00-3.50 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
60
4.00
PERCENT FINER
3.50-5.00 NA NA 2.28 2.21 3.17 2.69 - - - - - -
HIGHLTY 50
5.00
WEATHERED
MICA SCHIST
6.00 5.00-6.50 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
40
7.00
6.50-8.00 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
30
8.00
9.00 8.00-9.50 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - - 20
10.00
10
9.50-11.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
NX CORE
11.00
MICA SCHIST 0
12.00 11.00-12.50 WITH NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - - 0.001
SANDSTONE
13.00
12.50-14.00 NA NA 2.30 2.23 3.14 2.69 - - - 35 - -
14.00
15.00 14.00-15.50 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
16.00
15.50-17.00 NA NA 2.49 2.42 2.89 2.71 - - - 62 - -
17.00
18.00 17.00-18.50 SANDSTONE NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
19.00
18.50-20.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
20.00
Page - 40
0 10 20
100 0.00
1.50
90
3.00
80
4.50
70 6.00
7.50
60
9.00
PERCENT FINER
50
10.50
40 12.00
13.50
30
15.00
20
16.50
10 18.00
19.50
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
GRAIN SIZE IN mm O
1.50 m depth

1.50 m depth 2 64 34 0
Fig. - 1
Page - 41
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.00
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
7.50
9.00
10.50
12.00
13.50
15.00
16.50
18.00
19.50
1 10
IN mm OBSERVED CORRECTED
epth
Fig. - 2
Page - 42
Annexure-A4
ANNEXURE-A4
Determination of Allowable Bearing Capacity of Foundation on Rock
d) Based on rock mass rating (RMR value) using the Table – 3 given in
IS: 12070.
e) Based on classification using the Table – 2 given in IS: 12070
f) Based on international practice as recommended by The American
a) Analysis of Safe Bearing Pressure from the RMR System
Description
Strength (M Pa)
Weak 10-25 2
Very Weak 2-10 1
Extremely Weak <2 0
Poor 25-50 8
Very Poor <25 3
Page -43
Very Wide (m)
Close 0.06-0.2 8
Very Close <0.06 5
30 25 20 10 0
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
Slopes 0 -5 -25 -50 -60
below.
RMR 100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 20-0
Q ns (T/m2) 600-448 448-288 280-151 145-90-58 55-45-40
Page -44
as Joints are not very clearly defined. The RMR values for each bridge
location at founding levels are as below;
Depth of Foundation RMR Description of
RMR Value
below FBL Classification No. Rock as per RMR
3.00 m 15 V Very Poor

table – 2 below;
Net safe bearing
Material
pressure (t/m2)
trap rock
Soft Shale 40
from RMR system.
Page -45
Where

Nc = 2.N N
N = N N
Nq = N
N = tan2 45 + /2
ROB structure is as following:
Depth of q allowable (t/m2)
Type of Size of Recommended
foundation below RMR Classification ASCE
Foundation Foundation value (t/m2)
EGL method method method
3.00 m Isolated 8.0 m X 12.0 m 50 70 43.50 43.0
Page -46
Minor Bridge at
Details of BH - 1

WATER TABLE : Not Found DATE START : 25-09-2016
RETURN WATER COLOUR

PENETRATION RATE
STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
(mm/min)
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
0.00-1.50 NA 93 93 13 15,35,75 Nx
1.00
NOT ENCOUNTERED
NX CORE
BROWNISH
PARTIAL
MICA SCHIST 3.00 -
2.00
1.50-3.00 NA 75 75 15 15,23,33 Nx
3.00
Page - 47
DEPTH BELOW GL
3.00
2.00
1.00
NX CORE TYPE / SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
1.50-3.00
0.00-1.50
DESCRIPTION OF
STRATA
MICA SCHIST
LEGEND
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
SAND (%)
SILT (%)
NA
NA
CLAY (%)
ANALYSIS
GRAIN SIZE
SILT FACTOR
LIQUID LIMIT (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)

NA
NA
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS OF BH-1
LIMIT

ATTERBERG

2.38
2.41
DRY DENSITY in t/m3

2.34
2.34

1.71
2.99
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
2.70
2.72
-
-

-
-
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
SHEAR
-
-

PARAMETER
UCS / ROCK CRUSHING

45
50
STRENGTH (MPa)
-
-
VOID RATIO, e0

-
-
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
Table No.-2
Page - 48
Annexure-A5
ANNEXURE-A5
g) Based on rock mass rating (RMR value) using the Table – 3 given in
IS: 12070.
h) Based on classification using the Table – 2 given in IS: 12070
i) Based on international practice as recommended by The American
b) Analysis of Safe Bearing Pressure from the RMR System
Description
Strength (M Pa)
Weak 10-25 2
Very Weak 2-10 1
Extremely Weak <2 0
Poor 25-50 8
Very Poor <25 3
Page -49
Very Wide (m)
Close 0.06-0.2 8
Very Close <0.06 5
30 25 20 10 0
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
Slopes 0 -5 -25 -50 -60
below.
RMR 100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 20-0
Q ns (T/m2) 600-448 448-288 280-151 145-90-58 55-45-40
Page -50
RMR Value
1.50m 55 III Fair

table – 2 below;
Net safe bearing
Material
pressure (t/m2)
trap rock
Soft Shale 40
from RMR system.
Page -51
Where

Nc = 2.N N
N = N N
Nq = N
N = tan2 45 + /2
minor bridge is as following:

1.50 m Isolated 8.0 m X 12.0 m 175 150 34.67 34.0
Page -52
Minor Bridge at
Details of BH - 1


RETURN WATER COLOUR

STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
0.00-1.50 NA 60 50 18 5,13,30 Nx
1.00
2.00
1.50-3.00
NX CORE
MICA SCHIST 2,9,23
BROWNISH
NA 37 25 22 Nx
PARTIAL
0.5 m
WITH 5.00 -
SANDSTONE
3.00
3.00-4.50 NA 53 40 17 2,10,25 Nx
4.00
4.50-5.00 NA 68 60 15 3,8,16 Nx
5.00
Page - 53
DEPTH BELOW GL
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
4.50-5.00
3.00-4.50
1.50-3.00
0.00-1.50
DESCRIPTION OF
STRATA
SANDSTONE
MICA SCHIST WITH
LEGEND
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
SAND (%)
SILT (%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
CLAY (%)
ANALYSIS
GRAIN SIZE
SILT FACTOR
LIQUID LIMIT (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
LIMIT

ATTERBERG
-
-

2.42
2.37
-
-
DRY DENSITY in t/m3

2.36
2.31
-
-

2.54
2.60
-
-
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
2.69
2.70
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
SHEAR
-
-
-
-

PARAMETER
UCS / ROCK CRUSHING

-
-
55
45
STRENGTH (MPa)
-
-
-
-
VOID RATIO, e0

-
-
-
-
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
Table No.-2
Page - 54
Annexure-A6
ANNEXURE-A6
j) Based on rock mass rating (RMR value) using the Table – 3 given in
IS: 12070.
k) Based on classification using the Table – 2 given in IS: 12070
l) Based on international practice as recommended by The American
c) Analysis of Safe Bearing Pressure from the RMR System
Description
Strength (M Pa)
Weak 10-25 2
Very Weak 2-10 1
Extremely Weak <2 0
Poor 25-50 8
Very Poor <25 3
Page -55
Very Wide (m)
Close 0.06-0.2 8
Very Close <0.06 5
30 25 20 10 0
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
Slopes 0 -5 -25 -50 -60
below.
RMR 100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 20-0
Q ns (T/m2) 600-448 448-288 280-151 145-90-58 55-45-40
Page -56
RMR Value
1.50m 35 IV Poor

table – 2 below;
Net safe bearing
Material
pressure (t/m2)
trap rock
Soft Shale 40
from RMR system.
Page -57
Where

Nc = 2.N N
N = N N
Nq = N
N = tan2 45 + /2

1.50 m Isolated 8.0mX12.0m 140 100 31.14 31.0
Page -58
Major Bridge at
Details of BH - 1

RETURN WATER COLOUR

PENETRATION RATE
STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
(mm/min)
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
COMPLETE
COMPLETELY WEATHERED
0.00-1.50 NA 0 0 32 - Nx
1.00 ROCK
2.00
1.50-3.00 NA 16 0 23 2,5,9 Nx
NX CORE
BROWNISH
3.00
2.5 m
6.00 -
PARTIAL
MARBLE WITH
3.00-4.50 NA 61 32 15 2,7,14 Nx
4.00 MICA SCHIST
5.00
4.50-6.00 NA 71 49 12 3,10,28 Nx
6.00
Page - 59
DEPTH BELOW GL
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
4.50-6.00
3.00-4.50
1.50-3.00
0.00-1.50
DESCRIPTION OF
STRATA
MICA SCHIST
COMPLETELY
MARBLE WITH
WEATHERED ROCK LEGEND
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
SAND (%)
SILT (%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
CLAY (%)
ANALYSIS
GRAIN SIZE
SILT FACTOR
LIQUID LIMIT (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
LIMIT

ATTERBERG
-
-
-

2.46
-
-
-
DRY DENSITY in t/m3

2.40
-
-
-

2.50
-
-
-
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
2.72
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
SHEAR
-
-

33
32
PARAMETER
-
-
-

67
-
-
-
-
VOID RATIO, e0

-
-
-
-
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
Table No.-2
Page - 60
Annexure-A7
ANNEXURE-A7
m) Based on rock mass rating (RMR value) using the Table – 3 given in
IS: 12070.
n) Based on classification using the Table – 2 given in IS: 12070
o) Based on international practice as recommended by The American
d) Analysis of Safe Bearing Pressure from the RMR System
Description
Strength (M Pa)
Weak 10-25 2
Very Weak 2-10 1
Extremely Weak <2 0
Poor 25-50 8
Very Poor <25 3
Page -61
Very Wide (m)
Close 0.06-0.2 8
Very Close <0.06 5
30 25 20 10 0
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
Slopes 0 -5 -25 -50 -60
below.
RMR 100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 20-0
Q ns (T/m2) 600-448 448-288 280-151 145-90-58 55-45-40
Page -62
RMR Value
3.00 m 35 IV Poor

table – 2 below;
Net safe bearing
Material
pressure (t/m2)
trap rock
Soft Shale 40
from RMR system.
Page -63
Where

Nc = 2.N N
N = N N
Nq = N
N = tan2 45 + /2
major bridge is as following:

3.00 m Isolated 8.0 m X 12.0 m 140 100 39.19 39.0
Page -64
Minor Bridge at
Details of BH - 1


RETURN WATER COLOUR

STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
DS 1 0.00-0.50 - NA
1.00
SPT 1 1.50-1.95 13 30 13 19 NA
2.00 FINE SAND WITH
SP 4.00 NA
GRAVEL
3.00
SPT 2 3.00-3.45 20 30 20 27 NA
4.00
1.50 4.00-5.50 NA 0 0 32 - Nx
5.00
2.50 m
6.00
1.50 5.50-7.00 NA 0 0 28 - Nx
NX CORE
BROWNISH
COMPLETE
7.00 COMPLETELY WEATHERED
-
ROCK
1.50 7.00-8.50 NA 0 0 30 - Nx
8.00
9.00
1.50 8.50-10.00 NA 0 0 26 - Nx
10.00
Page - 65



UCS / ROCK CRUSHING

DRY DENSITY in t/m3

TYPE / SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
SPECIFIC GRAVITY

DEPTH BELOW GL
DESCRIPTION OF
STRENGTH (MPa)
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
VOID RATIO, e0
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
LEGEND
STRATA
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)

LIQUID LIMIT (%)
SILT FACTOR
100
SAND (%)
CLAY (%)
SILT (%)
90
DS 0.00-0.50 4 87 9 0 0.62 1.39
80
1.00
UDS 1.00-1.30 1 89 10 0 0.44 1.17 1.70 1.55 9.89 2.65 - 0.00 31 - 0.71 -
SPT 1.50-1.95 6 86 8 0 0.81 1.58 32 70

FINE SAND
2.00 NON
WITH GRAVEL
PLASTIC
(SP)
60
3.00
PERCENT FINER
SPT 3.00-3.45 1 90 9 0 0.52 1.26 34
50
4.00
40
4.00-5.50 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
5.00
30
6.00
5.50-7.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
20
NX CORE
7.00 COMPLETELY
WEATHERED ROCK
10
7.00-8.50 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
8.00
0
0.001
9.00
8.50-10.00 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
10.00
Page - 66
0 10 20 3
100 0.00
90
1.50
80
70 3.00
60
4.50
PERCENT FINER
50
40 6.00
30
7.50
20
10 9.00
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
GRAIN SIZE IN mm
1.50 m depth 3.00 m depth

OB
1.50 m depth 6 86 8 0
3.00 m depth 1 90 9 0
Fig. - 1
Page - 67
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.00
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
7.50
9.00
.1 1 10
E IN mm
3.00 m depth
OBSERVED CORRECTED
Fig. - 2
Page - 68
Annexure-A8
ANNEXURE-A8
( as per IS:6403-1981 )
1
F

 = 31  Nc =21.63 Nq =11.77 Ny =13.12
Founding q safe
EGL
table 1 of IS: 6403-1981.
IS:6403-1981.
Page-69
Correction for
( t/m2 )
From Graph
Value (mm)
water table
Correction
Corrected
Rigidity
Factor
Factor
Depth
(mm)
2.00 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 20 15 0.50 0.80 0.94 22.56 22.16
Page-70
Minor Bridge at
Details of BH - 1

WATER TABLE : 2m DATE START : 03-10-2016

RETURN WATER COLOUR

STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
DS 1 0.00-0.50 - NA
1.00
SPT 1 1.50-1.95 8 30 8 12 NA
2.00 FINE SAND WITH
SP 4.00 NA
GRAVEL
3.00
SPT 2 3.00-3.45 34 30 34 30 NA
4.00
1.50 4.00-5.50 NA 11 0 26 2,2,5 Nx

5.00
6.00
1.50 5.50-7.00 NA 11 0 25 2,3,3 Nx
7.00
2.00 m
1.50 7.00-8.50 NA 6 0 31 2,2,3 Nx

8.00
COMPLETE
HIGHLY
WEATHERED SANDSTONE
9.00
NX CORE
BROWNISH
1.50 8.50-10.00 NA 7 7 28 10,10,10 Nx
-
10.00
1.50 10.0-11.50 NA 8 0 25 2,3,5 Nx

11.00
12.00
1.50 11.50-13.00 NA 9 0 26 2,4,8 Nx
13.00
14.00 MODERATELY WEATHERED 1.50 13.0-14.50 NA 25 0 19 2,4,5 Nx

PARTIAL
SANDSTONE
15.00 0.50 14.50-15.00 NA 36 24 15 2,5,12 Nx
Page - 71



DRY DENSITY in t/m3

TYPE / SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
SPECIFIC GRAVITY

DEPTH BELOW GL
DESCRIPTION OF
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
VOID RATIO, e0
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
LEGEND
STRATA
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)

100
LIQUID LIMIT (%)

SILT FACTOR
SAND (%)
CLAY (%)
SILT (%)
90
DS 0.00-0.50 1 93 6 0 0.29 0.95 80
1.00
UDS 1.00-1.30 2 87 11 0 0.36 1.05 1.69 1.53 10.13 2.65 - 0.00 30 - 0.73 - 70
SPT 1.50-1.95 FINE SAND 3 88 9 0 0.48 1.21 30

2.00 NON
WITH GRAVEL
(SP)
PLASTIC 60
PERCENT FINER
3.00
SPT 3.00-3.45 6 87 7 0 0.71 1.48 34 50
4.00
40
5.00 4.00-5.50 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
30
6.00
5.50-7.00 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
20
7.00
10
8.00 7.00-8.50 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
HIGHLY
0
WEATHERED 0.001
9.00 SANDSTONE
8.50-10.00 NA NA 2.34 2.28 2.63 2.69 - - - 46 - -

NX CORE
10.00
11.00 10.0-11.50 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
12.00
11.50-13.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
13.00
14.00 13.0-14.50 MODERATELY NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -

WEATHERED
SANDSTONE
15.00 14.5-15.0 NA NA 2.47 2.42 2.07 2.70 - - - 58 - -
Page - 72
0 10 20 3
100
0.00
90
1.50
80
3.00
70
4.50
60
6.00
PERCENT FINER
50 7.50
40 9.00
30 10.50
20 12.00
10 13.50
0 15.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
GRAIN SIZE IN mm
1.50 m depth 3.00 m depth

OB

1.50 m depth 3 88 9 0
3.00 m depth 6 87 7 0
Fig. - 1
Page - 73
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.00
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
7.50
9.00
10.50
12.00
13.50
15.00
.1 1 10
E IN mm
3.00 m depth
OBSERVED CORRECTED
Fig. - 2
Page - 74
Annexure-A9
ANNEXURE-A9
( as per IS:6403-1981 )
1
F

 = 31  Nc =21.63 Nq =11.77 Ny =13.12
Founding q safe
EGL
table 1 of IS: 6403-1981.
IS:6403-1981.
Page-75
Correction for
( t/m2 )
From Graph
Value (mm)
water table
Correction
Corrected
Rigidity
Factor
Factor
Depth
(mm)
2.00 m 8.0 m x 12.0 m 20 15 0.50 0.80 0.94 22.56 22.16
Page-76
Major Bridge at
Details of BH - 1


RETURN WATER COLOUR

STRATA THICK. (m)
DEPTH (m) BELOW EGL
JOINT SPACING
PENETRATION (CM)
(MIN,AV.,MAX)
SIZE OF HOLE
SOIL CLASS.
WATER LOSS
TEST DEPTH (m)
NO. OF BLOWS
LEGEND
N (Corrected)
RQD (%)
N (Recorded)
TYPE
NO.
DISCRIPTION OF
SOIL STRATA
1.50 0.00-1.50 NA 0 0 32 - Nx
1.00
COMPLETELY WEATHERED
ROCK
2.00
1.50 1.50-3.00 NA 0 0 30 - Nx
3.00
COMPLETE
1.50 3.00-4.50 NA 13 0 28 2,3,5 Nx
4.00
5.00
1.50 4.50-6.00 NA 15 0 26 2,3,5 Nx
6.00
1.50 6.00-7.50 NA 15 0 28 2,6,8 Nx

7.00
NX CORE
BROWNISH
1.50 m
8.00
1.50 7.50-9.00 NA 33 0 23 2,6,9 Nx
9.00 MODERATELY WEATHERED

SANDSTONE
1.50 9.00-10.50 NA 40 23 16 2,8,20 Nx

10.00
11.00
PARTIAL
1.50 10.50-12.00 NA 39 33 13 2,8,26 Nx
12.00
13.00 1.50 12.00-13.50 NA 42 36 12 2,9,30 Nx
14.00
1.50 13.50-15.00 NA 50 37 10 2,7,28 Nx
15.00
Page - 77


UCS / CRUSHING STRENGTH (MPa)

DRY DENSITY in t/m3

TYPE / SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH OF SAMPLE
SPECIFIC GRAVITY

DEPTH BELOW GL
DESCRIPTION OF
(mv) (10-3 m2 / t)
VOID RATIO, e0
COHESION C, (t/sqm)
LEGEND
STRATA
GRAVEL (+4.75) (%)
PLASTIC LIMIT (%)

LIQUID LIMIT (%)
SILT FACTOR
SAND (%)
CLAY (%)
SILT (%)
0.00-1.50 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
1.00
COMPLETELY
WEATHERED
ROCK
2.00
1.50-3.00 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
3.00
3.00-4.50 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
4.00
5.00
4.50-6.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
6.00
6.00-7.50 NA NA - - - - - - 33 - - -
7.00
NX CORE
8.00
7.50-9.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
MODERATELY
9.00
WEATHERED
SANDSTONE
9.00-10.50 NA NA 2.42 2.36 2.54 2.70 - - - 53 - -

10.00
11.00
10.50-12.00 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
12.00
13.00 12.00-13.50 NA NA - - - - - - - - - -
14.00
13.50-15.00 NA NA 2.45 2.40 2.08 2.71 - - - 62 - -
15.00
Page - 78
Annexure-A10
ANNEXURE-A10
p) Based on rock mass rating (RMR value) using the Table – 3 given in
IS: 12070.
q) Based on classification using the Table – 2 given in IS: 12070
r) Based on international practice as recommended by The American
e) Analysis of Safe Bearing Pressure from the RMR System
Description
Strength (M Pa)
Weak 10-25 2
Very Weak 2-10 1
Extremely Weak <2 0
Poor 25-50 8
Very Poor <25 3
Page -79
Very Wide (m)
Close 0.06-0.2 8
Very Close <0.06 5
30 25 20 10 0
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
Slopes 0 -5 -25 -50 -60
below.
RMR 100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 20-0
Q ns (T/m2) 600-448 448-288 280-151 145-90-58 55-45-40
Page -80
RMR Value
3.00 m 25 IV Poor

table – 2 below;
Net safe bearing
Material
pressure (t/m2)
trap rock
Soft Shale 40
from RMR system.
Page -81
Where

Nc = 2.N N
N = N N
Nq = N
N = tan2 45 + /2

3.00 m Isolated 8.0 m X 12.0 m 120 100 35.34 35.0
Page -82
ANNEXURE-B
LIST OF REFERRED IS CODES
Field Investigation
1. IS : 1948-1970 Classification and identification of soils for general
engineering purposes (first revision) Amendment 2
2. IS : 1892-1979 Code of practice for sub surface investigations for
foundations
3. IS : 2131-1981 Method of standard penetration tests for soils
4. IS : 2132-1986 Code of practice for thin walled tube sampling of soils
Laboratory tests
1. IS : 2720-1983 (Part 1) Methods of tests for soils: Preparation of
dry soil samples for various tests (second revision )
2. IS : 2720-1980 (Part-2) Methods of test for soils: Determination of
water content (second revision ) Amendment 1
3. IS : 2720-1980 (Part-3/Sec 1) Method of test for soil : Determination of
specific gravity : Fine grained soils
4. IS : 2720-1980 (Part-3/Sec 2) Method of test for soil : Determination of
specific gravity : Fine , medium & coarse grained soils.(First revision)
5. IS : 2720-1985 (Part-4) Methods of test for soils: Grain size
analysis (Second revision)
6. IS : 2720-1985 (Part-6) Methods of test for soils: Determination of

liquid and plastic limit (Second revision)
Page-83
Foundation construction
1. IS : 1904-1986 Code of practice for design and construction of

foundation in soils : General requirements (Third revision)
2. IS : 6403-1981 Code of practice for determination of bearing capacity of

shallow foundations
3. IS : 8009-1976 (Part-1) Code of practice for calculation of settlements of

foundations : Shallow foundations subjected to symmetrical static vertical loads
(Amendment 2)
4. IS : 2911-1979 (Part-1-Sec.2) Code of practice for design and

construction of Pile Foundation ( Bored Cast in situ Pile )
5. IS : 2911-1985 (Part-4) Code of practice for design and construction of

Pile Foundation ( Load Test on Piles )
6. Design Aids in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (5th reprint) by

S.R. Kaniraj
7. IS: 1893 (Part-1): 2002 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of

Structures
8. IRC:78-2014 Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges

– Section : VII Foundations and Substructure
Page-84
ANNEXURE-IV
! " # $ % & ' (
2 456 56 2

7921
6789 321717 29 3
6789 322
8 2 8
9 2321
210123299 0

7921
3 976 9076948947 841 79

3 976
9 26
21012329 99
7 7
2
0123

7921 38492 3211 8492

7921406972 3211
67
6972 67
81739 7638 36419239 200 7 692946 3217261984 071 3276370 9
**+,-./ 012-06414+87897 60
:;;;;<=>? !%4@ABB2C9BD*2EC 29 0 H789 7261984 071 32763
369 292360 9I26 18F,*2874F0@-3* C 2672223216789 3 3!%(
52G-B0!"" " 7637 H0
"%!!E " 3217261984 071 3276370 9 H 0418 967029739 90821737212237739 2 36317
"E#!' ! 3217261970 9 2 3 6 3C021 **+,-./ 012-3425.452*6*267.*30276-4*17874*+ 23 980 9917 841 7937 8 369489 3578 369489 3
"E!% 297261970 9 29 68217) 2" 297 3 013!%(9082 ' 7
297 7 76809 3 7 6 36 **+,-./ 012-3425.452*6*267.*30276-4*17874*+ 266 3 28"!' 6! " "
! " # $ % & ' (
1
9 9
8 8
6 6
4 4
5 5
86 76583 3679 4 46 98A6A 76563

4!!"#$%&'()$-++"8680679
122223456 +74899):9;!)<9: 3@68 46 98A6A 76534
A343 7 3B5 748=#!)8.+=7$*!>: >96 >A 7 68334>
5,)?$9'11001 765679 @
10< 1 4 46 98A6A 76563 @ 98 3076 A6 8 566 56A67 556
1<0 4 46 963 5 73: 4!!"#$%&'()$*+),%+,)!!)-.%!*).-$+!./.+!" 7 9 08 6 93C
86D6 8383E68383F
100< 0 7 446 963 8 61 7 6 753 4>>>>98>5 >00 6
7 6 6 76833463 9 4!!"#$%&'()$*+),%+,)!!)-.%!*).-$+!./.+!" 3 A 810 013401 1
1
0 0 3580 3586 8

0123456898
01234569 2
86 8

835
8 8
138492
13849
3580
85335
653109
86

)#!* 104Q62560 3863 8 5S1 V 0 0383 0 4681804443V2 14468V104Q61 53

XXYZ[\]4^_`[dbRbYR
hiiiijklm nobpqrr`s3rtXùs 212g1 V 83 5x123 1804443V2 14468V104Q65
46403V558 3860 53{4QW8V0 2vZX`2ebvp[aX9444s 80918W8986 80123456569noy
42W5g01 83163 Qc`w[r^nUUPPU 104Q61 V
64S40456s84 3431
3V 428Q1618886Q11638W46Q
XXYZ[\]4^_`[ab̀c\bc`X0X`de\Xaèd[bXefebXY 8W6V 8Q 55|2 S13}61W25603 23456~
P UoRPnRnu 4681804443V2 14468V104Q61 53 0281T8U 831 Q65R 1SR
&! !"#$"%$"# '( XXYZ[\]4^_`[ab̀c\bc`X0X`de\Xaèd[bXefebXY 8005W6 x86 8VUPnu S 969noy9293V 9Q89PPz
0RPn5Pn P
+,$%-./$#0*??@&#<?70A/B1C?%/+C-D-.-18E#F<;G=?&?!H!H?7+I-5JC?&K#@?6.L/71?F<M3$&<'&K&?'0N$6.L/71?$% )<#F<;G=<'<!( <@&<::MO,IJ .01$+1/*23$4+56+789$2:;3$<$;;*;=$&>
12 012
3 245678933
5

6839 3
368
3 3

98642
5
6832
38668
39

(" ) 427P9589206396 38R4 U 2 263602 7934327776U50 47793U 427P9486

WWXYZ[\7]^_ZcaQaXQ
ghhhhijkl mnaopqq_r6qsW_tr 545f4 U 36 8w456 4327776U50 47793U 427P98
79726U883 639286y7PV3U2 5uYW_5dauoZ`W777r 3243V339 3245678989mnx
075V8f2 436496 Pb_vZq]mTTOOT 427P94 U
9 7R72789r37 6764
6U753P4943339P4496 3V79P
WWXYZ[\7]^_Zà_b[ab_W2W_cd[W`_dcZaWdedaWX 3V9U 3P 88z50R46{94V 58926056789|
O TnQOmQmt 7934327776U50 47793U 427P9486 2534S 3T 364 P98Q 4RQ
% !"#!$#!" &' WWXYZ[\7]^_Zà_b[ab_W2W_cd[W`_dcZaWdedaWX 3228V9 w3903UTOmt R9mnx56UP3OOm
2QOm8OT O
*+#$,-.#"/)>>?%";>6/@.A0B>$.*B,C,-,07D"E;:F<>%> G G>6*H,4IB>%J"?>5-K.60>E;L2#%;&%J%>&/M#5-K.60>#$(;"E;:F<;&;';?%;99:N+HI -/0#*0.)12#3*45*678#19:2#;#::):<#%=
2 3 2 3 035 2 3 2 3 035
797
1 24 969 77 416
0123456737 0123456897 012345687
012345 23435564
0 213401
012345
234 355644
213401
(" ) 01 4P 523 2R 3 109UR 232 4 3513 494542U1544 3U01 4P 1 2
WWXYZ[\4]^_ZcaQ5aXQ
ghhhhijkl mnaopqq_r2qsW_t9r V1 f109UR 32 w1 2R 13 494542U1544 3U01 4P
442U 3023 2yV4PV3U 05uYW_dauoZ`W6444r 3 6913363 0351 24 V6mnx
954 f 01321 2 Pb_vZq]mTTOOT 01 4P 109UR 0
V0444 r354 24251R
2U435P1 13533 P11 2034P
WWXYZ[\4]^_Zà_b[ab_WW_cd[W`_dcZaW5dedaWX 03 9UR 3P 9 z5121 2 24
O TnQOmQmt 43513 494542U15443U01 4P 1 2 0 351RS3T 0321R 0P QR 1Q
% !"#!$#!" &' WWXYZ[\4]^_Zà_b[ab_WW_cd[W`_dcZaW5dedaWX 3 V w3 3UTOmt 56V6mnx69 62U6P36OOm
VQOTOT O
*+#$,-.#"/)>>?%";>6/@.A0B>$.*B,C,-,07D"E;:F<>%> G G>6*H,4IB>%J"?>5-K.60>E;L2#%;&%J%>&/M#5-K.60>#$(;"E;:F<;&;';?%;99:N+HI -/0#*0.)12#3*45*678#19:2#;#::):<#%=
0 0 3580 3586 8

8 0123456898
2
138498
01234569
86 8

835
8 8
138492
13849
3580
85335
653109
86

)#!* 104R62560 3863 8 5T1 W 0 0383 0 4681804443W2 14468W104R61 53

YYZ[\]^4_à\ecScZS
ijjjjklmn opcqrssat3suYavt 212h1 W 83 5y123 1804443W2 14468W104R65
46403W558 3860 53|4RX8W0 2w[Ya2fcwq\bY9444t 80918X8986 80123456569opz
42X5h01 83163 Rdax\s_oVVQQV 104R61 W
64T40456t84 8X6W 8R 3431
3W 428R1618886R11638X46R
YYZ[\]^4_à\bcad]cdaY0Yaef]Ybafe\cYfgfcYZ 55}2 T13~125603 23456
Q VpSQoSov 4681804443W2 14468W104R61 53 0281U8V 831 R65S 1TS
&! !"#$"%$"# '( YYZ[\]^4_à\bcad]cdaY0Yaef]Ybafe\cYfgfcYZ 8005X6 y86 8WVQov T 969opz9293W 9R89QQ{ Q
0SQo5Qo
+,$%-./$#0*??@&#<?70A/B1C?%/+C-D-.-18E#F<;G=?&?!H!H?7+I-5JC?&K#@?6.L/71?F<M3$&<'&K&?'0N$6.L/71?$% )<#F<;G=<'<!( <@&<::OP,IJ .01$+1/*23$4+56+789$2:;3$<$;;*;=$&>
0 0 3580 3586 8

14034603 23 1
0123456898 8 138498

01234569 2
86 8

835
8 8
14034603 23 1
138492
13849
3580
85335
653109
86

+!%#, 10462560 3863 8 5T1 W 0 0383 0 4681804443W2 14468W10461 53

YYZ[\]^4_à\ecScZS
ijjjjklmn opcqrssat3suYavt 212h1 W 83 5y123 1804443W2 14468W10465
46403W558 3860 53{4X8W0 2w[Ya2fcwq\bY9444t 80918X8986 80123456569opz
42X5h01 83163 dax\s_oVVRRV 10461 W
64T40456t84 3431
3W 428161888611638X46
YYZ[\]^4_à\bcad]cdaY0Yaef]Ybafe\cYfgfcYZ 8X6W 8 552 T13|125603 23456}
R VpSRoSov 4681804443W2 14468W10461 53 0281U8V 831 65S 1TS
(# !"#!$%&$'&!!$% )* YYZ[\]^4_à\bcad]cdaY0Yaef]Ybafe\cYfgfcYZ 8005X6 y86 8WVRov T 969opz9293W 989RRp
0SRo5Ro R
-.&'/01&%2,AAB(%>A"92C1D3EA'1-E/F/0/3:G%H>=I?A(A#J #JA9-K/7LEA(M!%BA80N193AH>O5&(>)(M(A)2P&80N193A&'"+>%H>=I?>) >#*">B(><<IQ.KL "023&-31,45&6-78-9:;&4<=5&>&==,=?&(@
12 012
4726792605604
3 245678933
5

6839 3
368
3 3
4726792605604

5
6832
38668
39 98642

*$"+ 4279589206396 38T4 W 2 263602 7934327776W50 47793W 4279486

YYZ[\]^7_à\ecScZS
ijjjjklmn opcqrssat6suYavt 545h4 W 36 8y456 4327776W50 47793W 42798
79726W883 639286|7X3W2 5w[Ya5fcwq\bY777t 3243X339 3245678989opz
075X8h2 436496 dax\s_oVVRRV 42794 W
6W75349433394496 3X79
9 7T72789t37 YYZ[\]^7_à\bcad]cdaY2Yaef]Ybafe\cYfgfcYZ 3X9W 3 6764 8850T46}458926056789~
R VpSRoSov 7934327776W50 47793W 4279486 2534U 3V 364 98S 4TS
'" !"#$%#&%#$ () YYZ[\]^7_à\bcad]cdaY2Yaef]Ybafe\cYfgfcYZ 3228X9 y3903WVRov T9opz56W3RR{
2SRo8RV R
,-%&./0%$1+@@A'$=@!81B0C2D@&0,D.E./.29F$G=<H>@'@"I"I@8,J.6KD@'L $A@7/M082@G=N4%'=('L'@(1O%7/M082@%&!*=$G=<H>=(=")!=A'=;;PQ-JK !/12%,20+34%5,67,89:%3;<4%=%<<+<>%'?
2 3 2 3 035 2 3 2 3 035
797
1 24 969 77 416
0123456737 0123456897 012345687
012345 23435564
0 213401
012345
234 355644
213401
(" ) 01 4Q 523 2S 3 109VS 232 4 3513 494542V1544 3V01 4Q 1 2
XXYZ[\]4^_`[dbR5bYR
hiiiijklm nobpqrr`s2rtXù9s W1 g109VS 32 x1 2S 13 494542V1544 3V01 4Q
442V 3023 2{W4QW3V 05vZXèbvp[aX6444s 3 6913363 0351 24 W6noy
954 g 01321 2 Qc`w[r^nUUPPU 01 4Q 109VS 0
W0444 s354 24251S
2V435Q1 13533 Q11 2034Q
XXYZ[\]4^_`[ab̀c\bc`XX`de\Xaèd[bX5efebXY 03 9VS 3Q 9 |5121 2 24
P UoRPnRnu 43513 494542V15443V01 4Q 1 2 0 351ST3U 0321S 0Q RS 1R
% !"#!$#!" &' XXYZ[\]4^_`[ab̀c\bc`XX`de\Xaèd[bX5efebXY 3 W x3 3VUPnu 56W6noy69 62V6Q36PPz
WRPUPU P
*+#$,-.#"/)>>?%";>6/@.A0B>$.*B,C,-,07D"E;:F<>%> G G>6*H,4IB>%J"?>5-K.60>E;L2#%;&%J%>&/M#5-K.60>#$(;"E;:F<;&;';?%;99NO+HI -/0#*0.)12#3*45*678#19:2#;#::):<#%=
12 012
4726792605604
3 245678933
5

6839 3
368
3 3
4726792605604
986428864260560485046

98642
5
6832
38668
39

$/%)'0 4279589206396 384 2 263602 793432777650 47793 4279486

ZZ[\]^_7àb]fdd[
jkkkklmno pqdrsttbu6tvZbwu 545i4 36 8z456 432777650 47793 42798
79726883 639286|7Y32 5x\Zb5gdxr]cZ777u 3243Y339 3245678989pq{
075Y8i2 436496 eby]t`pXXVVX 42794
9 772789u37 6764
675349433394496 3Y79
ZZ[\]^_7àb]cdbe^debZ2Zbfg^Zcbgf]dZghgdZ[ 3Y9 3 885046458926056789
V XqVppw 793432777650 47793 4279486 2534W 3X 364 98 4
! ",' " #$%&'%()*(+* !%#%()# -. ZZ[\]^_7àb]cdbe^debZ2Zbfg^Zcbgf]dZghgdZ[ 3228Y9 z3903XVpw 9pq{563VVX
2Vp8VX V
$12*+345*)60EEF,)B# ! E&=6G5H7IE+51I3J3437>K)LBAMCE$,"E#'N$'N E"=1O3;PIE",Q%)F#E$<4R5=7E#LBS9*,#B- ,Q,E-6T*$<4R5=7E*+!&/B)LBAMCB-$B'.&BF,B@@8U2OP &467*"175089*:1;<1=>?*8@A9*B*AA0AC*,D
2 3 2 3 035 2 3 2 3 035
797
012345
234 355644
213401
1 24 969 77 416
012345 23435564
0 213401
0123456897
012345687 0123456737
(" ) 01 4P 523 2R 3 109UR 232 4 3513 494542U1544 3U01 4P 1 2

WWXYZ[\4]^_ZcaQ5aXQ
ghhhhijkl mnaopqq_r2qsW_t9r V1 f109UR 32 w1 2R 13 494542U1544 3U01 4P
442U 3023 2yV4PV3U 05uYW_dauoZ`W6444r 3 6913363 0351 24 V6mnx
954 f 01321 2 Pb_vZq]mTTOOT 01 4P 109UR 0
V0444 r354 24251R
2U435P1 13533 P11 2034P
WWXYZ[\4]^_Zà_b[ab_WW_cd[W`_dcZaW5dedaWX 03 9UR 3P 9 z5121 2 24
O TnQOmQmt 43513 494542U15443U01 4P 1 2 0 351RS3T 0321R 0P QR 1Q
% !"#!$#!" &' WWXYZ[\4]^_Zà_b[ab_WW_cd[W`_dcZaW5dedaWX 3 V w3 3UTOmt 56V6mnx69 62U6P36OOT
VQOTOT O
*+#$,-.#"/)>>?%";>6/@.A0B>$.*B,C,-,07D"E;:F<>%> G G>6*H,4IB>%J"?>5-K.60>E;L2#%;&%J%>&/M#5-K.60>#$(;"E;:F<;&;';?%;991N+HI -/0#*0.)12#3*45*678#19:2#;#::):<#%=
! " # $ % & ' (
2 2
456 56
76936948947

6789 321717 29 3
8492
7921406972 3211
67
2
7921 38492 3211
6972 67
8 8
9 2321
76936948947
210123299 0

3 976 9076948947 841 79

3 976
9 26
7 7
21012329 99
2
0123

81739 7638 36419239 200 7 692946 3217261984 071 3276370 9

**+,-./ 012-06414+87897 60
:;;;;<=>? !%4@ABB2C9BD*2EC 29 0 H789 7261984 071 32763
369 292360 9I26 18F,*2874F0@-3* C 2672223216789 3 3!%(
52G-B0!"" " 7637 H0
"%!!E " 3217261984 071 3276370 9 H 0418 967029739 908217372122377392 3
"E#!' ! 3217261970 9 2 3 6 3C021 **+,-./ 012-3425.452*6*267.*30276-4*17874*+ 23 980 9917 417 841 79 733
"E!% 297261970 9 29 68217) 2" 297 3 013!%(9082! 7
297 7 76809 3 7 6 36 **+,-./ 012-3425.452*6*267.*30276-4*17874*+ 266 3 28"!' 6! " "
! " # $ % & ' (
! " # $
3 3

797
0123456797
1 24363 0123456787
1 1
1 1
0123454212 1118424
1053 29 435 401401234553 4
1 24161 14 11232101 24

5412' 014 5232' 3 109' 232 43513445429 1544390141 2

))*+,-.4/01, 53&53*& %1 8109' &&
9::::;<=> !3?@AA1B2AC)1DB 32 1 2' 13445429 154439014
% 44293023 2%4% 39 05 E+)1 63E ?,2)6444B 3613 3630351 24%6!$ %
41F,A/ 014109'
!&&D 43513445429 1544390141 2 54 801 3212 29 43511353311203 4
D&&# 435134454291 2 3 %0444B354 ))*+,-.4/01,2314-341))156-)2 165,3)56763)* 03 9' 8 24251' 0518 512 4014
&D&! 032134454291 2 32 351'( 3 0321' 0&' 56%6!$629 6 636 1&
0321 1 01 424144 9 ))*+,-.4/01,2314-341))156-)2 165,3)56763)* 3% 3 %# %&
! " # $

7 7
0 0

012345678181 73456
7
2 2
35 76 78
13748517 788
3570
7
78 876735335 78 8767335

65310
1
876 1

012345677
41
284163 1046256083763 7 5 1 ! 03730 467817044843!2
184 467! 10461 53
##$%&'(4)*+& /-8-$ 21221 ! 0
344445678 -9:;;+<3;=#+>< 73 5B123 17044843!2 184 467! 10465
46403!557 3760 53C47!0 82?%#+20-? 9&,#444< 70177 76 78012345656
.+@&;)AA 10461 ! B
A> 467817044843!2 184 467! 10461 53 B 842520 1 73 163 161787761 163 7465352188
>A 467817044843!1 53 7 6 440456<784 ##$%&'(4)*+&,-+.'-.+#0#+/0'#, +0/&-#8010-#$ 76! 22 34381 3! 44278
128 13D61256032345612560323456E
AA> A 7317044843!1 53 73 02781" 7 731 65 863! 27AA 1
731 1 1024345651 404560 ! ##$%&'(4)*+&,-+.'-.+#0#+/0'#, +0/&-#8010-#$ 70056 72A 0 A5A

1
9 9
8 8
6 6
4 4
5 5
86 76583 3679 4 46 98A6A 76563

4!!"#$%&'()$-++"8680679
122223456 +74899):9;!)<9: 3@68 46 98A6A 76534
A343 7 3B5 748=#!)8.+=7$*!>: >96 >A 7 68334>
5,)?$9'11001 765679 @
10< 1 4 46 98A6A 76563 @ 98 3076 A6 8 566 56A67 543 386
1<0 4 46 963 5 73: 4!!"#$%&'()$*+),%+,)!!)-.%!*).-$+!./.+!" 7 9 08 6 686C6 8383D68383E
100< 0 7 446 963 8 61 7 6 753 4>>>>8>5 >001 6
7 6 6 76833463 9 4!!"#$%&'()$*+),%+,)!!)-.%!*).-$+!./.+!" 3 A 810 013401 1
1
% # ! &
518 8 5182780 8
8 8
8

8
012345674280 0 85412
8 8

7
800828551 80082851551
082
215

3 3
0425 7 43212605825 81 7 5856 4280 8440456 044287 432 15
(()*+,-4./0+4202) 7 7
89999:;<= %2>?@@0A5@B(0CA 85 15 8440456 044287 4321
4245118758215F438 70D*(052D>+1(444A 8 8882780 541212%&
330E+@. $$ 7 432 7
%$ C 4280 8440456 044287 432 15 604177 85 25 3 2 808823 2578423
C$ ! 4280 844045 15 83 2744412A804 (()*+,-4./0+1203,230((045,(1054+2(05652() 782 7 5450 181473 85 !"!#$
$$C % $ 785 844045 15 85 80 ' 8 785 7321 02%&!"!#$38$$
785 7 454121 4412 (()*+,-4./0+1203,230((045,(1054+2(05652() 812 8$! $ 1$
% # ! &

8 8
0123456834 01234568316
138405128030244 1
2 2
0123456898
01234569
1 1

13845 1384
2 4163 10462560! 3863 85 1 0383!0 468 18044432!1 44681046153

$$%&'()4*+,'0..%21231 0
455556789 .:;<<,=3<>$,? = 83 5C123 18044432!1 446810465
46403558 386053E4#80 2@&$,21.@:'-$9444= 80918#8986 8 0123456569
/,A'<*BB 10461 C
B? 468 18044432!1 44681046153 C ! 42#530183163 1618 88611638#46
?B 468 1804443153 8 6440456=8 4 $$%&'()4*+,'-.,/(./,$0$,01($-,10'.$121.$% 8#6 32 343 1 58C541832DB
BB? B 831804443153 83 028 1"8 831 65 96999C9DB989BB 1
831 1 1024345651 404560 $$%&'()4*+,'-.,/(./,$0$,01($-,10'.$121.$% 8005#6 82B 0B5B

518 8 8 5182780
8
012345674280 0 85412 541288
# #$%&2'(
7&#% 4!
2 )*#*% "" 0
215
54128547 541285 27
7 58401 854347
800828551 082 80082851551

7 58401
0;1,53< 7 43212605825 81 7e 5856 4280 844045e6 04428e7 432 15
$g*hi4j*!0!$
noooopqrs '!)"t5uvt m 7e 85 1x5 844045e6 04428e7 4321
4245e118758215|43f8e 70wg#!w)*&444t 8 8f882780 541212'(
604f1m7 85 25 3k%* cc 7 432 7e 7
2744412t804 $g*hi4j*&!kh!k#h&#*!0#l#!$ 78f2e x 5450 3 2 808823 2578f42312 f
c 'cv 4280 844045e6 04428e7 432 15 7
12565412421473 85vyz{{
80 d 8 785 7321 02'(2vyz{{38cc
+,- .83, .,/0+1231456476+,-1/145/ 9: $g*hi4j*&!kh!k#h&#*!0#l#!$ 81f2 x8268ecv c 1c c
0=>67?@A65B<QQR85N/,+-,+Q2IBSATCUQ7A=U?V?@?CJW5XNMYZQ08.Q/3+[03[+,Q.I=\?G]UQ.+8^15R/QP?GBI69I?>]AQ67-2;N5XNMYZNP59NDE_àaNR8NLLMb>\] 2@BC6.=CA<DE6F=GH=IJK6DLME6N6MM<MO68P
$ " % #
35808 8 35868
8 8
2

2
0123456898
2 01234569 2
8 8
8868335 86 886835335

1 1
0123456834 01234568316
1384051280322441 0123456292
653109

13845 1384
24163 104625603863 8 5&1 03830 468180444321446810461 53

(()*+,-4./0+422)21271 0
89999:;<= %2>?@@0A3@B(0CA 83 5F123 180444321446810465
464035583860 53!480 2D*(0252D>+1(9444A 80918898680123456569%
30E+@. 10461 F
% C 468180444321446810461 53 F 425701 83163 8861163846512560323456
C$# 46818044431 53 8 64&40456A84 (()*+,-4./0+1203,230(0(045,(1054+2(5652() 86 72 3431 1618
465411 403462 !10462" #
C% 8318044431 53 83 0281'8 831 65 & 969%969" #989 1&
831 1& 1024345651&404560 (()*+,-4./0+1203,230(0(045,(1054+2(5652() 80056 82 # 0 5
$ " % #
0 6 8 ; 1 9 < 2
782 78 23 21
2 2
9 78322 9
78399
9

78 23 21
721
72185 723,211
8,37 2 387 58 98707 7 981 7
4215012327780
387
2 2

5 5

421501232798778
782
72185 723,211
07 2
9
5 -!'9'-%/&(!34012 5
.
3-()-/!&/.&-(!-//!& 3-()-!/ ! 0'(&% 98 3 83"" ,335
'*$)*'+
3 (-&!'2 (&'2 ,-%). " ),- %). # $ % & 4 14 4
0123
137 5383 17237 200 8 9 727 532152 917 0 1 32 5308 7
5&&%#$>!4'0?)1)%4@ 9 0
ABBBBCDEF 01).5+'G7H&'I9G 27 0 8K7 52 917 0 1 32 5385
4 37 8582 7 23 08 7L454,2 15J#&'-)J0.(&G 2 92,2 23 217838534012 4
5*'/!066::6 53 9 K0
61:00I 6 532152 917 0 1 32 5308 7 K 091,8 @ 02 7 37 53 212 235 37 2,3585
6I:80< 0 532152 91708 7 25 3483G021 5&&%#$>!4'()'*$)*'&&'?-$&(0'-?)&1-"-)&% 2,39 @0 771 38 9 5,335274167289
6::I01 : 25752 91708 7 27 21=26 27 538 50134012 3916728952::0
27 07838583 9 5&&%#$>!4'()'*$)*'&&'?-$&(0'-?)&1-"-)&% 2 48,3 2 46:0< 4:085:0 6
0 6 8 ; 1 9 < 2
+ 8 5 9 , : 7 -
57 2 57 8
2 2

2345678
010 2345678
2 2
4 4

57 8

35 6 010
8 557
745
35 6728 682
253 263
6
875327715 325453714 35
3
87532 3

8 57557
35 6 7 45 682
253 263
66
57 2
'!(('%)&*!8+,-
4 2 30'*1'!) &*')! 2! 716382678"" 4
84.'!)& 4.'!)& " # $ % & /
8
4 6385 326484782 5 85 73 25 52 68 3 266654 3 668 326483 75
&&%#$<6!/( >1 1%434?3 2
@AAAABCDE +,1.F(G5H&(IG 5 7K345 3 266654 3 668 326487
6862577 5 82 75L642 2 4J#&(4'1J .*&666G 23 2 8 234567878+,-
4=()!+88338 326483 K
8,3++I 8 68 3 266654 3 668 326483 75 K 6427?23 5385 4383 843385 26847
8I35+7 + 68 3 266653 75 4 8662678G 6 &&%#$<6!/(*1(=$1=(&2&(>'$&* ('>1& '"'1&% 28 ?4 565 3 68764334782545678 54,56,7-
833I+, 3 53 266653 75 5 24 3; 8 53 487 8+,-8,56,7-4 338 3
53 3 3246567873626782 &&%#$<6!/(*1(=$1=(&2&(>'$&* ('>1& '"'1&% 22728 483+7 23+73+ 8
+ 8 5 9 , : 7 -
! " # $ % & '
8 8
0 0

2
0123456898 2
01234569
835
35864880
8 8
65310553 103 23 152 13
653109
1 1
85335

35688 58

86

24163 10462560 3863 8 51 0383 0 46818044432 1446810461 53

))*+,-.4/01,533*21281 0
9::::;<=> $3?@AA1B3AC)1DB 83 5G123 18044432 1446810465
46403558 3860 53H480 2E+)1263E?,2)9444B 809188986 80123456569$'
41F,A/!!! 10461 G
!$D ! 46818044432 1446810461 53 G 425801 83163 3 42816188861163846
!D"& 46818044431 53 8 6440456B84 ))*+,-.4/01,2314-341)0)156-)2165,3)6763)* 86 82 3431 046152 136125603 23456
!D$ 8318044431 53 83 0281(8! 831 65 969$'93 92989" 1
831 1 1024345651404560 ))*+,-.4/01,2314-341)0)156-)2165,3)6763)* 80056 82!& 05 !
! " # $ % & '
" # $ % & ' ( )
9 9
012 12

23456789 3 3 95678
4 4
5798 9
8753277532504503740 35
3596
9 57
87532
3 3
234567899

9

57 92

9 7557

98

3596
4 6385 326847820 5985 97 3 259502 689 392666540 3 6689
3268375
++,-./06123.75 5,434:3 2
;<<<<=>?@ "&5ABCC3D5CE+3FD 95 7I345 392666540 3 668932687
68625779 598275J692 4G-+3485GA.4+666D 9239998 9 234567878"&)
63H.C1"##!!# 32683 I
#&!""F # 689 392666540 3 6689 3268375 I 0 647:2 395385 5649 3839 9983385 968268 3
#F!$"( " 689 3926665375 9 8 662678D9 6 ++,-./06123.4536/563+2+378/+4387.5+ 8985+, 98 :4 565 3 7 40 3583 47825045678347825045678
#!!F"& ! 953926665375 95 249 3* 9# 953 87 8"&)549!"" 3
953 3 3246567873 626782 ++,-./06123.4536/563+2+378/+4387.5+ 8985+, 92278 94#!"( 2!"7!" #
" # $ % & ' ( )
! " # $ % & '
8 8
0 0

2 0123456898 2
0
0 01234569

3586 8
835
8 8
65310553 103 23 152 13
653109
3580
1 1
85335
86

24163 10462560 3863 8 51 0383 0 46818044432 1446810461 53

))*+,-.4/01,533*21281 0
9::::;<=> $3?@AA1B3AC)1DB 83 5G123 18044432 1446810465
46403558 3860 53H480 2E+)1263E?,2)9444B 809188986 80123456569$'
41F,A/!!! 10461 G
!$D ! 46818044432 1446810461 53 G 425801 83163 3 42816188861163846
!D"& 46818044431 53 8 6440456B84 ))*+,-.4/01,2314-341)0)156-)2165,3)6763)* 86 82 3431 046152 13125603 23456
!D$ 8318044431 53 83 0281(8! 831 65 969$'93 92989! 1
831 1 1024345651404560 ))*+,-.4/01,2314-341)0)156-)2165,3)6763)* 80056 82!& 05 !
! " # $ % & '
! # $ % & ' (
93 3
012342563489 4980
04 2
30 425 00 425

30 425
5 403 8 1403489 4980 19084
4 5
5 403
0 0
4

4 8 3
44
6 6
5
2054 03265 5394 54 8 0 34 493 25 0 32224980225 80326580 84
**+,-./2012-644+ 0 90 3
:;;;;<=>? %4@ABB2C4BD*2EC 4 8 H0 4 0 32224980225 803265
2523488 48 53 84I26" 3 F,*274F@-3*222C 8 30 " 8 5 30 4255%(
652G-B0!!! 032650 H
!%E 8! 25 0 32224980225 80326580 84 8H 92" 8930 84054 42 60508 88 5600548 "256
!E#' 8 25 0 3222480 84 6 522325C 2 **+,-./2012-3425.452*3*267.*3276-4*7874*+ 8 "5 9 4240 32560 1908480 53489 425
!E% 8 8 40 3222480 84 4 3 0)! 40 865 5%(4 6 ( 80
40 80 03 824258023253 **+,-./2012-3425.452*3*267.*3276-4*7874*+ 33 "5 8 !' 3! 8!
! # $ % & ' (
! " #
6 6

5 5
0 0
0 0

016474101900 0414 1234567940 4 01647 76334

33 0 76 0514 00 04500 1610 0514
5740 1& 0 4 5 716 1& 6330 2& 161 4 6706 447412530744 620 4
031
(()*+,-4./0+342%72)%5$0570 2& %3%
89999:;<= 2>?@@0A1@B(0CA 61 3051& 06 447412530744 620 4
$ 44126 16 31$4$962 75D*(0552D3>+1(444A 6 06966 670514 $# $
30E+@. 0 4 0 2& 3
%%C 46706 447412530744620 4 031 374597 03610 1 12345670 06766 00 1694
C%%" 46706 447412031 6 $444 A3674 (()*+,-4./0+1203,230((045,(13054+2(75652() 69 2& 753 14170& 4 70570105 1514
%C% 6106 447412031 61 5670&'6 610& %& 37$#12356# 0%
610 0 0 54314 044 2 (()*+,-4./0+1203,230((045,(13054+2(75652() 6 $9 65$" $%
! " #
! " # $
012 312

2456789 4 4 6789
5 5
74
68 90
0
68 2
9
9 68668 9 668
2456789
5558 87966 98642
4 4

046 7 84 0
5 7496 0427958923 6 96 8 40 26 632 79 4 2777653 4 779 04279486
''()*+,7-./*31% 1(%545640 2%%
788889:;< !1=>??/@6?A'/B@ 6 8456 4 2777653 4 779 042798
7972688 06 9286E7 2 0 5C)'/541C=*0'777@ 24 90 245678989!$
2/D*?- 0427940
!%%B 79 4 2777653 4 779 04279486 3 7586204 6496 675 494 944960 79
B%%# 79 4 27776486 90772789@ 7 ''()*+,7-./*01/2+12/'2'/34+'0/43*1' 4541'( 0 9 65 676 4 8 89454 7453 46704979
%B%! 0 64 27776486 6 25 4& 0 64 098% 9!$65 4 %
0 64 4 04257678984 727892 ''()*+,7-./*01/2+12/'2'/34+'0/43*1' 4541'( 2289 5# 2%8
! " # $
! " # $ % & ' (
2 2
456 56
76936948947

6789 321717 29 3
2
8 8492 3211 8
9 2321
76936948947 7921 38492 3211
6972 67
7921406972 67
210123299 0

9 26
21012329 99
3 976 9076948947 841 79
2 3 976
7 7
0123

7921 7921
6789 322
81739 7638 36419239 200 7 692946 3217261984 071 3276370 9
**+,-./ 012-06414+87897 60
:;;;;<=>? !%4@ABB2C9BD*2EC 29 0 H789 7261984 071 32763
369 292360 9I26 18F,*2874F0@-3* C 2672223216789 3 3!%(
52G-B0!"" " 7637 H0
"%!!E " 3217261984 071 3276370 9 H 0418 967029739 908217372122377392 3
"E#!' ! 3217261970 9 2 3 6 3C021 **+,-./ 012-3425.452*6*267.*30276-4*17874*+ 23 980 9917 841 79 733378711
"E!% 297261970 9 29 68217) 2" 297 3 013!%(9082 E 7
297 7 76809 3 7 6 36 **+,-./ 012-3425.452*6*267.*30276-4*17874*+ 266 3 28"!' 6! " "
! " # $ % & ' (
! " #
6 6

5 5
0 0
0 0
016474101900 0414 1234567940 4 01647 76334

33 0 76 0514 00 04500 1610 0514
5740 1& 0 4 5 716 1& 6330 2& 161 4 6706 447412530744 620 4 031
(()*+,-4./0+342%72)%5$0570 2& %3%
89999:;<= 2>?@@0A1@B(0CA 61 3051& 06 447412530744 620 4
$ 44126 16 31$4$962 75D*(0552D3>+1(444A 6 06966 670514 $# $
30E+@. 0 4 0 2& 3
%%C 46706 447412530744620 4 031 374597 03610 1 12345670 06766 00 1694
C%%" 46706 447412031 6 $444 A3674 (()*+,-4./0+1203,230((045,(13054+2(75652() 69 2& 753 14170& 5701940 4 05077
%C% 6106 447412031 61 5670&'6 610& %& 37$#12356C 0%
610 0 0 54314 044 2 (()*+,-4./0+1203,230((045,(13054+2(75652() 6 $9 65$" $%
! " #

012 312

2456789 4 4 6789
046 7 84 0
5 5
68 90
0
68 2
9 68668 9 668
9
98642
4 4

2456789

74
5 7496 0427958923 6 96 8 40! 26 632 79 4 27776!53 4 779 !04279486
##$%&'(7)*+&/- -$ 545240! 2
344445678 -9:;;+<6;=#+>< 6 8B456 4 27776!53 4 779 !042798
79726!88 06 9286C7 !2 0 5?%#+50-?9&,#777< 24 90 245678989
.+@&;)AA 0427940! B
A> 79 4 27776!53 4 779 !04279486 B 3 7582204 6496 75 494 944960 79 279 454
>A 79 4 27776!486 90772789< 7 ##$%&'(7)*+&,-+.'-.+#2#+/0'#,+0/&-# 010-#$ 0 9! 25 676 4 6!
7453 46D94 58926356789E458926356789F
AA> A 0 64 27776!486 6 25 4" 0 64 098 96!5 AA 4
0 64 4 04257678984 727892 ! ##$%&'(7)*+&,-+.'-.+#2#+/0'#,+0/&-# 010-#$ 2289 5A 2A8A

7 8 9
6 6
5 5
4 4
2 2
1 1
0 0
42 32046 6235 6 1612654A2A63202

1 !"#$%&'(#,**!424/235
011112345 7*61788(98: (;59 6 @24 12654A2A63201
A1636B06 314<"(4-*<6#)=9 6=5266=A636241=7
0+(>#8&788??8 320235 @
8?77; 8 1612654A2A63202 @ 54/326A2 4602266602A23600242
8;?97 7 1612652 60 396 1 !"#$%&'(#)*(+$*+((,-$)(-,#*-.-*! 365 /4 2
242C244D244E
8??;7 ? 36112652 6 46268 362 30 1==7==4=06=??7 2
362 2 32412 5 1 !"#$%&'(#)*(+$*+((,-$)(-,#*-.-*! 6 A648?7 ?81?8 8
7 8 9
! " #
8 8
0 0

0123456898
2 01234569 2
0
0
3586 8

835
8 8
3580
85335
653109
1 1
86

24163 10462560 3863 8 51 0383 0 46818044432 1446810461 53

&&'()*+4,-.)20$0'$21251 0$$
6777789:; 0<=>>.?3>@&.A? 83 5D123 18044432 1446810465
46403558 3860 53E480 2B(&.230B<)/&9444? 809188986 80123456569#
1.C)>, 10461 D
$$A 46818044432 1446810461 53 D 425501 83163 3 428161888611638465
A$$" 46818044431 53 8 6440456?84 &&'()*+4,-.)/0.1*01.&0&.23*&/.32)0&3430&' 86 52 3431 56121412 13125603 23456
$A$ 8318044431 53 83 0281%8 831 65$ 969#93 92989 1$
831 1 1024345651404560 &&'()*+4,-.)/0.1*01.&0&.23*&/.32)0&3430&' 80056 82" 0$5
! " #
! " #
012 312

2456789
5 2456789 5
68 90

68
012 312
68 2

8668
9
98642
4 4

57496 04279589236 96 840 26 632 79 4 2777653 4779 04279486
&&'()*+7,-.)20$0'$5 45540 2$$
6777789:; 0<=>>.?6>@&.A? 6 8D456 4 2777653 4779 042798
7972688 06 9286E 7 2 05B(&.530B<)/&777? 24 90 245678989 #
1.C)>, 0427940 D
$$A 79 4 2777653 4779 04279486 D 37585204 6496 675 494 944960 79
A$$" 79 4 27776486 9 0772789? 7 &&'()*+7,-.)/0.1*01.&2&.23*&/.32)0&3430&' 0 9 55 6764 27
9454745346458926356789
$A$ 0 64 27776486 6 25 4% 0 64 098$ 9 #65 4$
0 64 4 04257678984727892 &&'()*+7,-.)/0.1*01.&2&.23*&/.32)0&3430&' 22 89 5 " 2 $8
! " #
SCHEMATIC ARRANGEMENT AT RURAL SECTION
A A
DETAIL-A
UNLINED DRAIN IN RURAL AREA
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
FEASIBILITY CUM PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS RAS-BEAWAR-MANDAL SECTION OF NH-158
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd.

TYPICAL DRAIN DETAIL FOR RURAL SECTION
NH DIVISION, PALI 15th Floor, Tower 9B
DLF Cyber City Phase-III, Gurgaon 122 002
REV DATE DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS BY
Cad File No: C:\Users\vibhorduttp\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_2592\ TTS-13238-D-MD-DS-001_Rural Drain.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd. TYPICAL DETAILS FOR PIPE DRAIN
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-DS-002_Pipe Drain.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd. TYPICAL DETAILS OF BUS BAY AT PLAIN/ROLLING
15th Floor, Tower 9B AREA 2 LANE SECTION
NH DIVISION, PALI
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-001_Bus Bay.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd. TYPICAL DETAILS OF BUS BAY AT PLAIN/ROLLING
15th Floor, Tower 9B AREA 4 LANE SECTION
NH DIVISION, PALI
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-001_Bus Bay.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:

TYPICAL BUS SHELTER
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-002_Bus Shelter.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
250m
500m
TRUCK
LAYBYE
TRUCK
LAYBYE
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd. TYPICAL DETAILS OF TRUCK LAYBAY
15th Floor, Tower 9B 2 LANE SECTION
NH DIVISION, PALI
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-003_Truck Lay Bay.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
250m
TRUCK
500m
LAY-BY
TRUCK
LAYBYE
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd. TYPICAL DETAILS OF TRUCK LAYBAY
15th Floor, Tower 9B 4 LANE SECTION
NH DIVISION, PALI
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-003_Truck Lay Bay.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:

TYPICAL DETAILS OF OVERHEAD / GANTRY SIGNS
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-004_Cantilever Gantry.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
TRUCK
BABRA LAYBYE
BILARA BILARA
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:

TYPICAL DETAILS OF TRAFFIC SIGNS
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-005_Traffic signs.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:23 PM
500m 500m
GIVE
WAY
50
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd. TYPICAL DETAILS OF TRAFFIC SIGNS
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:

TYPICAL DETAILS OF TRAFFIC SIGNS
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:

TYPICAL ERECTION DETAILS OF TRAFFIC SIGNS
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-008_Erection details of Traffic signs.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:24 PM
m
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:

TYPICAL DETAILS OF OVERHEAD / GANTRY SIGNS
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-009_Full Gantry.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:24 PM
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd. TYPICAL WATER HARVESTING SYSTEM
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-010_Water Harvesting System.dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:24 PM
CLIENT: CONSULTANT:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Feedback Infrastructure Service Pvt. Ltd. TYPICAL DETAILS PEDESTRIAN MARKING
Cad File No: \\GAN-SERVER\Projects\Feasibility_NH-158\CAD\HIGHWAY\Drawings\Typical Drawings\Miscellaneous Drawings\PKG-II_30+050 to 74+000\ TTS-13238-D-MD-MS-011_Pedestrian marking .dwg Plot Date: 11 December, 2019 - 4:24 PM

Corrigendum 2 With Annexures

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Corrigendum 2 With Annexures

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Corrigendum 2 With Annexures

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

No. RW/NH-12014/02/2019/RAJ/PKG.

Dated: 28th January, 2020

REQUEST FOR BIDS (RFB)

Rehabilitation and Upgradation to 2-lane with paved Shouders configuration of

1. Add point no. (iv) of Cl. 1.1 of Section-III of RFB as following:

“Bidder shall submit an undertaking/compliance of the following in respect of

Joint Venture (existing or intended)

The description of works

(b) Core Sector

3. A revised Schedule-B is placed at Annexure-I.

1 Development of the Project Highway

2 Rehabilitation and augmentation

3 Specifications and Standards

1 WIDENING OF THE EXISTING HIGHWAY

1.2 WIDTH OF CARRIAGEWAY

2 GEOMETRIC DESIGN AND GENERAL FEATURES

2.2 Design Speed

2.4 Right of Way

Design Chainage Proposed Row

2.5 Type of shoulders

2.6 Lateral and vertical clearances at underpasses

Location of Service Right Hand

2.9 Grade separated structures

2.9.1 List of Vehicular underpass

2.9.2 List of Vehicular underpass grade-II

Design Improvement Proposal Vertical

2.9.3 Cattle and pedestrian underpass /overpass

Sl. Design Chainage (m)

Typical Cross Section Type 8

Typical Cross Section Type 9

Typical Cross Section Type 10

Typical Cross Section Type 11

Typical Cross Section Type 12

Typical Cross Section Type 13

Typical Cross Section Type 14

(a) Major Intersections

(b) Minor Intersections: -

Sl. Design Chainage Type of

2.12.2 Raising of the existing road: Nil

Sl. Design Chainage Length Village

Design Chainage (m)

3.2 Design requirements

As per Section 5 of the Manual

3.3 Design Period and strategy

3.4 Design Traffic and Pavement Design

List of reconstruction stretches are given below.

Design Chainage (m)

5.1.3 All bridges shall be high-level bridges.

5.2.3 Improvement Proposal for Culverts shall be given below:

(i) Improvement proposal with box culverts:

Existing Structure Type Improvement Proposal

1 102+185 31+841 Slab 1 1.900 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2x2

6 101+220 32+802 Slab 1 4.000 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x4x3.0

8 100.130 33+625 Pipe 2 1.6 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x3x2.0

12 97.092 36+242 Pipe 1 0.5 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2.0x2.0

15 90.270 41+952 Pipe 2 0.9 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2.0x2.0

16 89.038 43+077 Pipe 1 0.5 Reconstruction Box Culvert 1x2x2