Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
UKTRP-87-29
by
Herbert F. Southgate , P.E.
Chief Research Engineer
and
Robert c. Deen , P . E.
D irector
in cooperation with
K entucky Transpor tation Cabinet
and
Federal Highway Administration
U S Department of Transpor tation
T he contents of this report r e f l e c t the views of the
authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data
p r e s en t e d here in. The c o n t e n t s do not nec e s s ar i ly r e f l e c t the
official views or policies of the Univer s i ty of Kentucky , of the
K e n t u c k y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C a b i n e t , or o f t h e F e d e r a l H i g hway
Adm i n i s t r a t i on.
This report does not cons t i tu t e a s t andar d ,
specification, or regulation.
The inclusion of manufacturer names
and t r adenam es are for ident i f ic a t i on pur p o s e s and ar e not to
considered as endorsementse
October 1987
REPORTS ISSUED
Research Study KHYPR-84-96
Development of a Composite Pavement Design Methodology
==============================================================================
UKTRP
REPORT NO.
84-3
84-11
84-12
85-13
86-21
87-28
87-29
TITLE
DATE
Feb 1984
Apr 1984
Apr 1984
May 1985
Sep 1986
Oct 1987
Oct 1987
UKTRP-87-29
4. Title oncf Subtitle
5. Report Dote
October 1987
Pavement Designs Based on Work
7. Author's)
H. F. Southgate and R.
c.
Deen
UKTRP-87-29
KYHPR-84-96
Type of Report and Period Covered
Final
u. Spons oring Agency Code
16. Abstract
Pavement Design
Failure Criteria
Work Concepts
Thickness
Portland Cement Conc rete
Asphaltic Conc rete
19. Security Claul f. (af thh report)
Unclassified
Form DOT F 1700.7
Unclassified
(B-72)
50
22. Price
INTRODUCTION
thickness design
theory with
empirical
experience.
The
lat ter three revisions ut ilized a failure criterion of tensile strain at the
bottom of
BACKGROUND
sampling of materials
from
each
layer ,
data
to permit
complete
analysis.
Those
designated
Traffic
Curves IV and VI (3-6 million and 10-20 million EWL , respectively) represented
two levels of equivalent wheelloads ( EWLs ) .
Further analyses
(160-320
adjustments , making pavements for Curve X (160-320 million EWL) thicker than
before .
The 1959 Traffic Curves were based on a 5-kip EWL and were converted
Pavements
associated with a given traffic curve were thought at that time to manifest
approximately the same surface deflections.
ELASTIC
THEORY
In 196 8 ,
APPLIED
TO
1959 CURVES
(2 ) .
Those analyses indicated that pavements associated with the 1959 Traf fic Curve
X r e s u l t e d in the same ver tical compr e s sive s t r ains rather t h an t h e same
surface deflections.
ELASTIC
MODULI
The elas tic modulus for the asphaltic concrete pavements on the AASHO
Road Te s t was determined to be approximately 600 ksi (7) . This corresponded
a l s o t o a m e an annu a l t em p e r a t u r e o f 6 0 d e gr e e s F.
T h e m e a n annu a l
layers for
subgrade
CBRs
greater
than 17,
leading
to
unrealistic results.
Ma tching theory to Tr a f fic Curve X a l s o permi t t ed deve lopm ent of a
r e l a tions hip of moduli for t h e cru s h e d s tone layer as a function of t h e
m o du l u s o f t h e asphaltic concr e t e and t h e CBR o f the su b gr ade .
Ana l y s e s
indicated that the modulus o f the crushed stone layer increased a s the CBR o f
t h e subgrade increased.
be estimated as the CBR equivalent to the asphaltic modulus (480 ksi) divided
by 1500 -- a CBR of 320.
log(F)
i n which F
fac tor u s ed
modulus
CBR
to multiply 1500
for
California
Bearing Ratio.
CBR
to
o b t ai n
the
FATIGUE CRITERIA
Dorman and Metcalf (9) determined from laboratory tests that fatigue of
asphaltic concrete could be described by
log( a )
in which ea
concrete.
log(EAL)
the bo t tom of
t h e a s p h a 1 t ic
The above relationship ( Figure 1 ) was used in the development of the 1971 (4 )
and 1981 (5) thickness design methods.
While develop ing the 1 9 6 8 Kentu cky thi ckne s s de s ign curves (3 ) , a
vertical compres s ive s train of 2.4 x 10 4 at the top of a CBR 7 subgrade was
determined to correspond to a fatigue of 8 x 106 18-kip EALs under the center
o f one 9-kip circularly loaded area.
Damage factors ,
in which
(1 .2504 ) (P-1B)
P
DF
--------------------------------------------------
thick were
subjected to a range of loads and analyzed using the Chevron N-layer program.
An arithmetic mean of the vert ical compressive strains ( for different pavement
t hicknesses) was calculated for each of the various loads.
value was plotted versus the associated EAL calculated using Equation 2 to
produce Figure 2.
criterion relat ionship for high EALs that was not an extension ( extrapolation)
of trends for EALs less than 8 x 1 06 ,
resulting in thicker designs for large
EALs.
1971
KENTUCKY
the subgrade
market roads would preclude speeds necessary for hydroplaning because of water
s t anding in the ruts on the pavement surface.
Thus,
Curve IA
t h e required
thicknesses associated with both the asphaltic concrete and subgrade strain
c ri t eria and adding a proportion of the di f f erence in thicknesses to t h e
t hickness required by the
(3 ).
could be
Analysis of Kentucky
Thus,
However, the same approach was not applicable for the development
to
develop
design method
incorporating
both
stress and
strain
c riteriae
and
deflections
us ing
superposition principles
at
any
designated
location within the X-Y-Z coordinate system , the Z coordinate being the depth
below the surface .
Reference 1 1 .
within
the
same
group
tires/ axles ,
tire
contact
uneven
pressure s ,
etc.
of
t i re
loads
ranging f r om 2 , 00 0
t o 8 , 00 0 p ounds
on 500-pound
increments per tire were applied to each pavement for a two-tired single axle
w i th a spacing to represent a steering axle ,
a four- tired
single axle ,
an
Additional studies
were initia ted to quantify the effects of different axleloads within the same
g r oup
of axles
( tandem and
tridem)
(13 ) ,
ad d i t ional ax les
in a g r oup ,
These analyses
permit ted development of load equivalency factor s , or damage fac tor s , for axle
and t i re arrangemen t s u sed at
( 1 5 ) a s w e l l a s new
Howeve r , the
account for uneven axleloads within a tandem or tridem group for axles weighed
o n s ta t ic weigh scales ( 1 4 ) .
The
effects of
increased
tire
( 14 ) .
depending on
Results of
the
those analyses
equivalencies
resulted
in an accumulated
fatigue
that
the Kentucky
was
1. 27
times
vehicle, summed for that truck classification, and an average value calculated
for each truck classification.
U s ing the Kentucky load equivalency r e l a t ions hip s to calcu l a t e the
average load equivalency per trip for each vehicle classification results in a
c a lcul a t ed 1 8-kip EAL t h a t is appro x i m a t e l y 7 3 p e rcent of that u s ing the
AASHTO load equivalency r e l a t ionships.
Combining the
loading between the axles within that group of axles increases the calculated
EAL by approximately 20 percent.
effects
of uneven load
Combining the
increased
tire
contact
1981
1971
The modulus of
the asphaltic
An
18-kip four- tired single axleload for tire spacings in use on current trucks
w a s app l i e d to the s u r f ace o f each pavement.
p r e s s u r e w a s u s e d i n a l l ca s e s.
The 8 0- p s i tire co n t a c t
For a given subgrade modulus , the vertical compressive strain at the top
o f the subgrade was plotted as a function of thickness of asphaltic concrete
by v i sual f i t .
d rawn.
pavem e n t s where
the
thickne s s
of
SO ,
the a s p ha l t ic conc r e t e wa s
the
same
7 5 , and 1 0 0 )
o f a s p ha l t ic c o nc r e t e
(5) .
(18)
cement- treated
RUTTING INVESTIGATIONS
W i th the influx of heavy trucks into the coal fields of Kentucky came
increased ru t ting of heavy duty pavements.
To
i nve s tiga t e this phenom enon, 4 - f o o t wide trenches were dug to a depth of
approximately 3 feet so various layers could be observed carefully.
t h o s e pavem e n t s c o n s i s ted of 1 7 and 18
c oncrete.
inc h e s of
Two of
full- d ep th asphal t i c
Distortion in the
thicker
between wheelpaths ,
indicating
shear
and sliding
on ,
a layer of
asphalt cement.
To verify shear flow was occurring , two 0.25-inch wide by 0. 25-inch deep cuts
were made in the surface of the pavement.
t o the centerline of the road , and the second cut was perpendicular to the
centerline.
These cuts were filled with glass beads used in traffic paint to
After
three weeks , the cuts in the wheelpaths were displaced downhill approximately
0 . 6 inch.
displaced laterally.
FUNDAMENTAL RELATIONSHIPS
WORK
The following equation ( 1 0 ,
11,
19)
was
added
4
or energy
eij
of
of
strain energy,
= Poisson's ratio
component
for
the
all
Thus ,
i t was assum e d tha t , for a unit volume a t a given point in the pavement
s tructure, work also was equal to the calculated strain energy density ( Work =
in. 3 x psi = in.-lb).
WORK STRAIN
The equation
two
di f f erent
terms,
each
any individual
This value has been called work strain and is taken as the
beam genera l ly are such that the s train gage is fu nc tional only in the
direction of the longest dimension.
the asphaltic concrete has been used to develop theoretical thickness design
curveso
I t should be noted that, direc t l y under the c e n t er of the load, the
radial strain equals the tangential tensile strain.
However,
location, the tangential tensile strain is the larger of the two, but in most
c ases is only slightly larger than the radial component.
t h e r a dial component be ignor ed, and how shou l d the radial component be
included?
at any location other than under the center of the loaded area.
The 1981
(20 ) ,
and the Shell design method (2 1 ) have utilized the tensile strain component at
the bottom of the asphaltic concrete and the vertical compressive strain at
the top of the subgrade and ignored all other components.
design procedure incorporates
cri teria.
all
strain,
or
stress,
No known thickness
components
into
its
Work strain incorp orates the effects of all strain components and
a three-dimensional summation
of
strain
energy
density
that
The area of
work were identified in a previous study ( 2 2 ) , and maximum unit work was noted
t o be under the e d ge of the tire closest to
s tress/ strain component
The
to point
t h e o u t e r e d ge o f t h e t i re c o n t a c t a r e a.
T h e ve r t i c a l c o m p o ne n t o f
to layer thicknesses
much wider range of values and permits easier usage in developing thickness
design curves .
Thus , for convenience and ease of use , work st rain has been
chosen as the variable upon which to base the thickness design curves.
relationship between work at the bottom of the asphaltic concrete with respect
t o location along the axis of the axle.
slightly larger beneath the edge of the inside tire than under the edge of the
outside tire; but the difference was negligible , particularly when compared to
t he value of work under the center of the loaded area.
For two-layered pavement structures ( 2 2 ) , the primary contributor to work
was the shear component -- stress or strain.
from the center to the edge of the tire varied greatly, and the variation was
predominantly due to the shear component.
10
A t an interf ace ,
and
t o m o v e vertically
moduli of
asphaltic
concrete,
sub grade
were
p o lynomial
equations
for
various
combinations
to interp o l a t e
for
within
other
third degree
that
m a trix
of
required pavement
thicknesses.
at
the
bot t om
of
the
asphaltic
concrete
and
vertical
The correlation
Since work strain is the net effect of all components , the correlation between
work strain and radial strain is not as good as for work strain and tensile
s t rain .
Thus ,
the
relationship between work strain and vertical compressive strain at the top of
the subgrade has a very narrow band of data scatter .
Many laboratory fa tigue tes ts measure the tensile st rain component.
Thus , the relatively close correlation between work strain and tensile strain
11
laboratory
Confidence in
DAMAGE FACTORS
Fatigue is defined as
----------------------------------------------------
The 1959 Kentucky design curves were based on the following fatigue equation
for single and tandem axles (2 , 3 ) :
6
in which DF5 9
A
co n s t ant
that
is
the
slope
of
the
s e m i l o g a r i thm i c
f o u r t i r e s a n d a v a l u e of
1 . 1254 for
t andem
axleloads;
B
(P - 1 0 )
(P
18 )
(P - 3 2 )
axleload in kips.
The 1981 Kentucky thicknes s design curves were based on the general equation
expressed as
log(DF8 1 )
i n which DF 8 1
C + D(P ) + E(P) 2
and
12
C , D, E
coefficients
A table
A s a resu l t ,
For example ,
resulting
ranging from 2 8 t o 5 2 ,
determined
for
Figure 8
s hows the relationship between EAL and work strain at the top of the subgrade ,
and the correlation is much better .
curves is a s s ociated with the range in the per centages of the asphaltic
concrete of the total thickness described above.
1981 curves might be attributable to the use of one component of strain rather
than work strain.
work strain, the 1959 curve is associated with a higher design EALs ( thicker
pavement) than that for the 1981 curve .
s train ,
FATIGUE RELATIONSHIPS
The 1959 Kentucky thickness
the
( one for 1959 design curves and one for 1981 curves) for data that had been
a s sumed to be essentially the same .
was possible to es timate the 20-year EAL based on each year's traffic data as
13
shown in Figure 9 .
an EAL calculated using the 1959 damage factors to an equivalent value based
upon the 1981 damage factors given by
DF
in which
2
(
a+
b*P
+c*P
)
10
a, b, c
=
=
These correlations show that the empirical experience matches the theoretical
work strain at the top of the subgrade while the limiting tensile capacity of
the asphaltic concrete is no t exceede d .
less
for both
the
with the 1981 Kentucky thicknes s designs for the range of low EALs.
However ,
large discrepancies occurred for low CBR values in the range of high EALs.
Thu s ,
regression equations
three
ranges of
for the development of all thicknes s design curves presented in this report .
14
The "hook" at each end of the criterion line (5 ) has been straightened
f or each of the three criterion lines in Figure 11 .
The re s u l t i s that
designs for low volume roads are slightly thicker than those required by the
7 EAL s ) , design
1981 Kentucky design curve s .
For very high 18-kip EALs (10
thicknesses are slightly thinner than those required by the 1981 curves ( 5 ).
having
asphaltic concrete.
4-inch
thickness
of
dense-graded
aggregate
below
the
Design thicknesses
shown on the
vertical axes in Figures 12-15 are the total thickness of all layers above the
subgrade .
a function of
the size
of broken piece s .
concrete.
a sphaltic concrete are presen ted for three moduli of broken and sea ted
portland cement concrete pavements ( Figures 16-18 ) ,
s hown
in
be calculated
Table 2.
A SPHALTIC
that
at
least 5
inches
of
asphaltic
concrete
almo s t identical ,
the
15
coefficient of heat
two
absorption for
Ther e f or e , a
the
If
expansion i s not possible , compressive forces will increase and may result in
crushed concrete at the faces of sawed joint s , or blowups may occur .
Any overlay over a joint
If
that joint .
the required
With heavier
structure .
axle loads
and increased
tire
contact
pressures , rutting has been observed in other states and provinces as a major
problem . This phenomenon may be a result of shear flow within the asphaltic
concrete layer .
Nei ther a cr itical magnitude of shear stress/ strain nor a fatigue-shear
relationship has been identified in literatur e .
However,
current research
relatively low.
8 is not appropriat e .
depended almos t entirely upon the work strain at the bottom of the portland
c em ent concr e t e s lab .
16
by
the Ameri c an
The PCA design
volumes and lesser gross loads in the 1940's as compared to much higher truck
The concept of work
a s sumption
the
existing
asphaltic
developed
concrete pavement
has
on
the
deteriorated
until the modulus is 200 ksi instead of the 480 ksi of new material .
The same
to
are no t
It
i s conceivable that corners might break off and cracks develop at mid- slab
p rematurely.
Locating new sawed joints directly over old joints and cracks is
concrete were seen in Iowa where the sawed joint was only 0 . 25 inch from a
crack reflected from the underlying slab.
Joint s e a ling
becomes more expensive when two closely spaced joints occur because the new
s awed joint does not coincide with the old joint .
SUMMARY
subgrade.
Shear is a material problem ,
However,
the location of maximum shear is much nearer the surface than had
been thought and the maximum tolerable value of shear strain, or stre s s , is
much less than had been thought .
17
c oncrete ..
the
cons truction
asphaltic
to
existing
concrete
pavements
and
for
DESCRIPTION
New pavements, 33 percent asphaltic concret e ,
67 percent dense-graded crushed stone base
12
13
14
15
16a
16b
18
17a
17b
18 a
18b
19
FUTURE RESEARCH
The theme of the final sess ion of the Sixth International Conference on
S tructural Design of Asphalt Pavements held on July 17 , 1987 , was "Paving the
Gap".
P r o f e s s o r P e t er Pe l l ,
Such is the case with the concep ts of work and work strain.
Additional refinement of
potential for analyzing data collected for the Long Term Pavement Performance
port ion of the Strategic Highway Research Program.
A
cursory analysis
indicated
significant
than
tire
that
19
to 40 p e rcent of
the
IMPLEMENTATION
concrete
p avements and asphaltic concrete overlays on broken and seated portland cement
concrete pavement .
20
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
H. F . S o u t hg a t e , R. c. D e e n , D . 11. C a i n , a n d J. G. M a y e s ,
"Modification to Chevron N-Layer Computer Program ," Research Report
UKTRP-87-28 , Kentucky Transportation Research Program , College of
Engineering , University of Kentucky , Lexington, KY , Oc tober 1987.
12.
21
Laboratory
of Highway
Experiment
1949.
Washington,
Highway
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Thickness De sign
Asphalt Pavements for Highways and Stree t s ,
Manual Series No . 1 (MS-1 ) , The Asphalt Institute, College Park, MD,
Sep tember 198 1 .
21.
22.
23.
24.
22
&
Sons , New
2 5.
2 6.
23
LIST OF FIGURES
F igure
l.
F igure 2.
F i gure 3.
Adjustment of Design
Thickness for Rut ting as a
Function of Repetitions of 18-kip EAL .
F igure
4.
Work at
the Bottom of Asphaltic Concrete versus
Location along Axis of Axle.
F igure
5.
Re l a t i onship
b e tween W o r k S t rain and Tens i l e
S train a t Bottom
of
Asphaltic Concrete.
F igure
6.
Relationship
between Work Strain
and Vertical
Compressive Strain at Top of Subgrade .
F igure
7.
Relationship
between
Work S train at Bottom of
Asphaltic Concrete and Repetitions of 18-kip EAL .
F igure
8.
Re l a t i o n s h i p b e twe e n W o r k S t r a i n a t T o p o f
Subgrade and Repetitions of 18-kip EAL.
F igure
9.
F igure 10.
Pavement
D e s ign P r o cedure
Control or Strain Control .
F igure 11.
F igure 12.
Thickness
Design Curves for Pavement Structures
Comprised of 33 Percent Asphaltic Concrete and 67
Percent Crushed Stone Aggregate Bas e .
F igure 13.
F igure 14.
F i gure 15 .
24
for E i t h e r S t r e s s
EAL
Figure 16.
Thickness
Design Curves
for Asphaltic Concrete
on Broken and S e a t e d Po r t land Cement Conc r e t e
Having a Young's Modulus o f 2 5 ksi .
Figure 17.
Thickness
Design
Curves for Asphaltic Concrete
on Broken and S e a t e d Po r t land Cement Conc r e t e
Having a Young's Modulus o f 100 ksi .
Figure 18.
Thickness
Design
Curves for Asphaltic Concrete
on Broken and S e a t e d Po r t l and Cement Conc r e t e
Having a Young's Modulus o f 200 ksi .
Figure 19.
25
TABLE 1 .
log(Damage Factor)
================================================================
COEFFICIENTS
AXLE
CONFIGURATION
Two-Tired Single
Front Axle
-3.540112
2 . 728860
o. 289 133
F our-Tired Single
Rear Axle
-3 .439501
0.423747
1. 846657
E ight-Tired
Tandem Axle
-2.979479
-1 . 26 5 144
2. 007989
Twelve-Tired
Tridem Axle
-2 . 740987
-1. 873428
1. 964442
S ixteen-T ired
Quad Axle
-2. 589482
-2. 224981
1. 923512
26
TABLE 2 .
==========================--=====--===========
===-======
--
OLT
a + b*log(EAL) + c*( log(EAL) ) 2
where OLT = overlay thickness and
=
a , b, and c
regression coefficients
f(CBR)
d + e*log(CBR) + f*(log(CBR))2
=
MODULUS OF
BROKEN PCC
(ksi)
THICKNESS OF
BROKEN PCC
( inches)
25
a
b
c
-39 . 55341825
12 . 27682107
-{) . 612631087
7 . 559521621
-2 . 774707235
0 . 210962531
-o. 181394144
0 . 0884178858
-o. 0077519796
10
a
b
c
-70. 28424248
20. 54802239
-1 . 169270477
21 . 272191482
-6. 5107715697
0 . 4633902917
-1 . 578324527
0 . 46901845188
-o.o335234984
a
b
c
-51 . 97485309
15 . 181766663
-{) .819240853
10. 138201032
-3 . 5133660621
0 . 2696910591
-{) . 494600481
0 . 1729875084
-{). 0137252471
10
a
b
c
-72 . 03822884
20. 439819522
-1 . 171268401
15 . 174210016
-4 . 8767616024
0. 3613069921
-o.837114874
0 . 2654316355
-{). 0199286739
a
b
c
-58. 32810531
16 . 282821001
-o.898751519
11 . 980305722
-3. 9776753781
0. 3016042334
-o . 661994556
0 . 2156855133
-o. 0165359824
10
a
b
c
13 . 616843885
-5 . 016295968
0 . 6511910044
-{) . 538274742
-o. 3930013094
0.0458919219
0 . 0051893437
0 . 0298301792
-{). 0036225523
100
200
COEFFICIENT
d
COEFFICIENT
27
10
21
6(
18pc
.....
......
... ...
r-.. ...
...
r-.. ...
......
.....
......
1--...
-...
..._
.....
....
--o
......
-...
:"""
-...
...
-5
10
3
10
F i gure
1.
4
10
Re l a t i onsh i p
Aspha l t i c
10
1 8-KIP EAL
10
between
7
10
Tens i l e Stra i n
A x l e l oad .
28
at
8
10
Bottom
1 8-k i p
of
S i ng l e
....
....
....
"
....
'\
'!\
10
-4
10
10
10
10
10
10
18-KIP EAL
F i gure
2.
29
1 00
II
80
60
40
20
0
10
10
10
10
10
10
1 8 KIP EAL
F i gure 3 .
Ad j us tment
of
Des i g n Th i c: l:ness
30
for
18-k i p EAL .
R u tt i.ng
as
il
4!100 LB
4!100 LB
c:L c:L
l
I
.c.
u
.5
AXLE
SUM OF WORK
THROUGH 8 INCHES
O
---- F ASPHALT I C
CONC R E T E AND 8
INCHES OF SUBGRADE
....____ 8 1NCHES OF
--
ASPHALTIC CONCRET
ONLY
8 INCHES OF SUB
GRADE ONLY
30
20
50
40
60
70
80
Y D i stanc e , Inches
F i gure 4 .
Work
at
the Bo t tom
of
Aspha l t i c
31
Concrete
versus
_,
'!l'
IV
/
/
/
10 "4
5.
10
Re l a t i onh i p
between Wor k S tr a i n and Tens i l e
a t Bo t tom o f A5pha l t i c Concrete .
32
-3
Str a i n
w
0
<(
a:
(!)
m
:::>
C/)
LL
2
1 0..
1/
3
1 0-
1 4 Jlliflr
a..
lei:
<
4
1 0-
a:
0
-5 v
1 0 -5
10
4
1 0VERTICAL STRAIN AT TOP OF SUBGRADE
Fi gure
6.
R e l a t i onsh i p
between
Work
Str a i n
33
and
Ver t i c a l
,1959
NS
()
""' I
.....
'
191 IKtf
10
IGNS I
10
r-
10
10
10
1 8-KIP EAL
Fi gure
7.
Re l a t i onsh i p
Aspha l t i c
between
Conc r e t e
Work
S tr a i n
34
of
at
Bottom
1 8-k i p EAL .
of
N.
t.
1 95
m;
DE Sl l.jI"
m. 1 ,K'l II
10
...,
,_
I
IG s
10
10
1"":00
10
18-KIP EAL
Fi gure
B.
35
Top
of
Subgrade
:.-
,.
'
;...-
103
60
62
l.-'
64
/.
,.,..
loo""'
,.,..
..... ,...
--
_,
66
'
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
86
CALENDAR YEAR
Fi gure
9.
Est i mated
Annua l
1 8-k i p
36
Year .
10
10
10
10
18-KIP EAL
FATIGUE AT BOTTOM OF
ASPHALTIC CONCRETE
At:, MODUWS
480 KSI
10
10
10
106
10
cb
... 10
10
10
F i gure
10.
Pavement
or
Des i g n P r o c edure f o r
Str a i n Cont r o l .
37
-4
10
10
10
WORK STRAIN
E i ther
S t r ess
Con t r o l
10
-2
(!)
LL
.....
r--im
>7 v
106
1 8-KIP . EAL
F i gure
11.
Wor k
Str a i n
Cr i ter i on for
at
Top
of
Sub g r ad e
38
vs
1 8-k i p
EAL
40
f3
25z
38
36
34
. ,""'
1"\\[J
32
30
...-,,
;,r"J[
' .
28
i=
26
,-,.. n /IV/0
,_
,,,
0\
1\.P
..
I l
24
....
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
"'
v
/ 1/
r7
.L; :..17r::;
4
/
/
1-L- 2
...
_/
...
...Iii'
.....
1./
'".:.;;
r.,...o"
'"
""'
""'
s:
e:;
-7
/
3 -7"
/
/
,
/
....
....
7
""
_/
I;
li"'
_/ _.. ""'
" 1.-v
7 17' "' '""
_/' 1/
.... _/' v.... 1:0...... ....
_/
_ii
""
_/ 5 17
/ r,r
/1 6 'I'
'7,v
..
_/ 1/ IV
_/ _/ ""'
_/' _.. ..
/.-- "/
10
1 8-KIP EAL
F i gure
12.
Th i c kness
Comp r i sed
Des i gn
of
Curves
for
Pavement
Structures
39
and
67
CBR
36
34
ffi
32
:::c
0
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
I
"" hMl'J I I
16
ffi
14
12
lfJ
""'
'-
'"''"' -.
.;'
./
./
/
,.
!:;;;
""'
.;'
li'
-:;..
.;'
GO'
,..,.
....
....
/ I;' I;'
11
/ I;'
V :/ I;'
._, ""- !:"
":;..
""'
/ .,. ......
/ ....
10 8
10
5
10
10
10
10
1 8-KIP EAL
F i gure
13.
T h i c k ness
Compr i sed
F'er c:ent
Des i g n
of
Crushed
50
Curves
F'er c:ent
fcr
Pavement
Aspha l t i c:
S t one A g g r e g a t e Base .
40
Struc tures
Conc r e t e
and 50
CBR
26
f3
:I:
PL l HI
24
22
20
en
f3
z
1-
12
f3
c
I'
10
8
10
I;'
I/
I;'
/ / I;'
/ /l/
V"/....::
l'_h
/ l/
v v l/
/ I/:
//
. J::
/
V/::...
.-:
/"h
/
"'
Q 16
14
..........
_"l
nut Jl
18
FE
-2
ss I = ]!"
11
10
10
10
10
1 8-KIP EAL
F i gure
14.
T h i c kness
Comp r i sed
Pel-cent
Des i g n Cul-ves
cf
Crushed
for
Pavement
S t r uc tures
41
and
25
24
4-"":..
Rl
'A
"''"
liAnr II
cR
lEI
1 1 Jr
:J I\
v ..;I-'
v....
1-".,.
./ /
I/
v
/ ILI'
/
CBR
-2
-3
r-5
l -7
-1 1
810
:,....:
'I
10
1 8-KIP EAL
F i gure
15.
Th i c: kness
Des i g n
Comp r i sed
of
Curves
Aspha l t i c:
for
42
Pavement
Conc:rete
on
S t r Lic: tures
Inc:hes
of
18
16
14
I 12
N Pi
PCC MC o
su
II
1 lx
10
....
1.......
!/
/ v ,.
//.......... iii'
Ki
25 Sl
..us
10
16
UJ
"
PCc
suBG M
HiI
14
,.
/ /
v/ :.....
1I1C.I 25
16.
EAL
CBR
be
KS
v
BR
Th i c kness
1.;
...
/ 1./
"/ 1/ ""
v 1/'!.; I.v....""
.. ....
..
y
!::"
10
-9
-1 1
/v
4 5
10
VA....
I/
1::7 v
bKEfl
12
F i gure
I/
v
v ., I/
v .,v I;
v..,...._,.. ......1.-'
V
/v....
v
/
/ v :...-
-3
,.
/
......
...... ..,
18-KIP
18
,.
"""
i:
Si
NC1-1
9 -
CBR
"""
......
v 1/
/v
3
....
1.-'
1.-'
....
/ v l.-'
/ ......
V/
!::?'
10
18-KIP EAl..
Des i g n Curves
f o r Aspha l t i c
-5
-7
9
-1 1
10
Concrete
Broken
and Seated Pcr t l and Cement Concrete Having
Young ' s Mod u l us o f E5 k s i .
43
on
a
CBR
16
9 - I" c 4
PCC M 'r
SUB 3R I[) =
-
"'
ws
!3R
5(
/ "' ..-
7
-9
-1 1
V.h v
f9
w
v/ jI/ .;;V_/v,
v
/ v/
I'
/v/
"
/ 0 /
V/v.: .I
100 KSI
2
3
KEN p be
//
/ /.I
6
10
10
10
10
18-KIP EAL
16
--
1 0 IN<
PCC
su_
M< D Ll
u
EN c
00 Kl l
liS - 1 50b
Cl
v ""
I/ ,;
'/!/ ::;
.
1/ ....,
1/J..- .-
II'"'
K:;BR
/
-./I/!.-
./
'...--'
%
%;;
"/
'
18-KIP EAL
Figure
17.
T h i c kness
Des i gn
Curves for Asph a l t i c
Concrete
on
a
Bro ken
and Seated P o r t l and Cement Ccncr e t e Hav i ng
Young ' s Modu l us of
1 00 k s i .
44
PC
uhr
-
EN
1M
I
9 ln "
. Ill
200
ln 1 L
11 0
F c:c
,KSI
ICBR
-2
. ...r
7
9
V' ""
./
v
./"I-" ......
v
V/ / ......
V//v ""
4 6
10
18
16
PCC
14
10
10
l '"
Ul 1n
18-KIP
200
In 1 1
II' l
EAL
18.
""'
Th i c kness
Brc k en
and
10
10
<SI
10
10
CBR
6
0
_......
/ /""
.....
./ / .......
18-KIP
Des i g n
Seated
PO :;
If
F i gure
/ /L,...
""'/v ...... ,.....
h
//.t:'l ::::
v
EAL
....
/ ......
/ / /./
"'/ ,....,...... .. //'/
/..,- %
v../.:: ,.
0
45
ksi .
-7
l- 9
.:....1 1
7
10
10
-5
Cement
Cone: rete
cn
a
Concrete Hav i ng
5-INCI
14
,_.,
ft
ov
....
/
/
1-4
1/
f
10
111-KP EAI.
10
18
1
10
CBR
6.5-INCH
IC
CRETE
Sl
-6
I-'
1/
/
//
V/
v
18
CBR
IC
It;.
ll
-6
8
-
/
:,....-'
/ 1.;'
/
/
1
10
F i gure
19.
Po r t l and Cement
on
Aspha l t i c
Concrete Havi ng
E l ast i c i ty o f 200 k s i .
46
a Young ' s
Concrete
Mod u l us
of