Design of CC Pavement - VRVRLatest

Prof.
VR VINAYAKA RAO

DESIGN OF RIGID
HIGHWAY PAVEMENTS
5/10/2014 6:59 AM BITS Pilani
CONCRETE PAVEMENT OPTIONS

Jointed Plain Concrete Pavements

Continuously Reinforced Concrete
Pavements

Pre-stressed Concrete Pavement
FACTORS AFFECTING PAVEMENT DAMAGE
Vehicle
Pavement
Environment

Speed
GVW
Pavement type, thickness, roughness
Axle forces
Axle and tyre properties
FACTORS AFFECTING RIGID
PAVEMENT DESIGN
Axle/Wheel Loads
Single Axle 10.2t, Tandem 19t & Tridem Axle 24t

Load Repetitions

Tire Pressure (0.7 to 1 Mpa) 0.8 Mpa

Thickness > 20Cm Tire Pressure need not
be considered

Lateral Placement of the Axles
FACTORS AFFECTING RIGID
PAVEMENT DESIGN (Contd..)
Unpredicted Heavy Truck Movements
Load Safety Factor (1.2, 1.1 & 1.0 for three
hierarchies of roads)

Design Axle Load 98
th
Percentile

Design Period (15 to 30 Years)

Design Traffic: IRC 9 Traffic Census

Tire Tangential to Longitudinal Edge - Critical
FACTORS AFFECTING RIGID PAVEMENT
DESIGN (Contd..)
Fatigue 25% of Two-Lane Two-Way Commercial
Vehicles (Design Traffic)
Four or Multi Lane Highways 25% of
Commercial Vehicles in the Predominant
Direction
CSA = [365 * A * {(1+r)
n
1}] / r

Temperature Differential = f(Solar Radiation received,
Thermal Diffusibility
of CC, Losses Due to Wind
Velocity etc.)

Table 1 - IRC 58 2002 (Six Different Regions in India)

CHARACTERISTICS OF SUB-GRADE & SUB-BASE
Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction (K) Pressure
per Unit Deflection of Foundation @ Limiting
Deflection
Limiting Deflection 1.25mm
Plate Diameter 75cm
K
75
= 0.5 x K
30
CBR K Correlations (Tables 2, 3 & 4)
125 Micron thick Polythene Layer between CC
and DLC Layers to Reduce Interlayer Friction
Drainage Layer above Sub-grade
FACTORS AFFECTING RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN
(Contd..)
Characteristics of Concrete

Design Strength
S = Target Ave. Flexural Strength @ 28 days
= S
+
Z
a

S

= Characteristic Flexural Strength @ 28 Days
Z
a
= Tolerance Factor for Desired Confidence
Limits (Table 5 IRC 58)
= Expected Standard Deviation of Field
Samples (IS 456 2000)
(Contd..)

Flexural StrengthMR Test3
rd
Point LoadingIS 516
Aggregate Size > 19mm - 15x15x70 Cm
Aggregate Size < 19mm - 10x10x50 Cm
Flexural Strength 4.5 Mpa
E = 3 x 10
5
Kg/Cm
2

Poissons Ratio = = 0.15
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion
= 10 x 10
6
/
o
C
(Contd..)
Fatigue Behavior of CC (Minors Hypothesis)

Stress Ratio (SR) = Flexural Stress / Flexural Strength
N = Unlimited for SR < 0.45
N = [4.2577 / (SR - .4325)]
3.268

for 0.45<SR<0.55
Log
10
N = (0.9718 SR) / 0.0828
for SR>0.55
Table No: 6 Allowable Repetitions
JOINTED PLAIN CEMENT
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
Most Popular Rigid pavement Option
Maintenance Costs increases with the
increase in the joint spacing
Maximum joint spacing should be 12.2m

CONTINUOUSLY REINFORCED
CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT
Elimination of Joints Reduced
thickness
Thickness of CRCP Will Workout to be 70-
80% of the conventional pavement.
Cracks are held tightly by the reinforcement
Punch-outs are the major type of distress
Design equations for JRCP can be used for
CRCP

PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PAVEMENT
Concrete is weak in Tension, strong in
compression
Thickness is governed by modulus of rupture
which varies with the tensile strength of
concrete
Pre-application of compressive stress
reduces the tensile stresses caused by traffic
loads, decreases the thickness
Less probability of cracking and fewer
transverse joints, less maintenance and
longer life

PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PAVEMENT
Slab Length Varies from 90 to 232m
Slab Thickness 152mm (Maximum)
Post tension method is Frequently Adopted
More Frequently used for Airport Pavements,
Saving in Thickness
Thickness of Pre-stressed Highway Pavement
will be Sufficient Enough to Provide Cover for
the Pre-stressing Steel
Still in the Experimental Stage
RIGID HIGHWAY PAVEMENT DESIGN
Guidelines for the Design of Plain Jointed
Rigid Pavements for Highways IRC: 58 2002,
2011
AASHTO Method, 1993
PCA Method
ACI Method
IRC: 58 2002 METHOD OF
RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN

Guidelines cover the design of Plain
Jointed cement concrete pavements with
or without dowels
Applicable to roads having a daily
commercial traffic (vehicles with laden
weight exceeding 3T) of over 150
NEW FEATURES OF IRC: 58 - 2002
Computation of Flexural stress due to
placement of single and tandem axle
loads along the edge
Introduction of the cumulative fatigue
damage approach in the design
Revision of criteria for design of dowel
bars
CRITICAL STRESS CONDITION
Additive Flexural Stresses due to Load and
Temperature Differentials Critical
Tandem Axle Causes 20% lesser load than single
axles Super Position of Negative Bending
Moment due to one dual wheel over the other
Average Spacing of Tandem Axles 1.31m
Curling - Top Convex during Day and Top
Concave during the Night
Corner Discontinuous in 2 Direction More
Critical
Corner Temp. Stress is Negligible
CRITICAL STRESS CONDITION
Temp Stresses will be Maximum during the day
when there is maximum temp. differential at
Edge and Interior Regions

Night Critical for Corner Region Corners
tending to warp up
Corner Critical No Dowel Bars are Provided
Corner Critical Aggregate Interlock is Absent

CALCULATION OF STRESSES
EDGE STRESSES

Due to Load: Westergaards and Pickett & Rays
Chart Techniques IITRIGID.EXE

Appendix 1 for Different Single and Tandem
Axle Loads (Stresses have been Given)

Westergaards Equation Modified by Teller and
Sutherland are not Applicable for Different Wheel
Configurations and hence not Useful
EDGE STRESS

Due to Temperature: Westergaards
Equation using Bradburys Equation

S
te
= E t C / 2.0

Figure 2 for Bradburys Coefficient as well
as Stress Values

CORNER STRESS

Westergaard's Equation (Modified by Kelly)

S
cl
= (3P/h
2
) * { 1 (a 2/l)
1.2
} (kg/Cm
2
)
a = Radius of Equivalent Circular Contact
Area (Cm)
l = Radius of Relative Stiffness (Cm)
= [(Eh
3
)/{12(1-
2
)K}]
0.25

STRESS RATIO AND FATIGUE ANALYSIS

Cumulative Fatigue Damage for
Different Axle Loads shall be Less than
1.0
Procedure for Cumulative Fatigue
Damage is Given in Appendix 2 of
IRC 58 - 2002

EROSION CONSIDERATION
& HARD SHOULDERS
Multi Axle Vehicles Usually Cause Erosion at the
Bottom of the Pavement
To Prevent, Paved Shoulder Shall be Extended by
1.5m beyond the Pavement
DLC Shall be Extended by 40 to 50 Cm towards the
Shoulder
In addition, Full Depth Bituminous Shoulder or tied
CC Shoulder Shall be Constructed to Protect
Pavement Edge
Anchor Beam and Terminal Slab
IRC: 58 2002 DESIGN PROCEDURE
Stipulate design values for the various
parameters
Decide types and spacing between joints
Select a trial design thickness of
pavement slab
Compute the repetitions of axle loads of
different magnitudes during the design
period
Calculate the stresses due to single and
tandem axle loads and determine the
cumulative fatigue damage (CFD)
If the CFD is more than 1.0, select a higher
thickness and repeat the above steps
Compute the temperature stress at the
edge and if the sum of the temperature
stress and the flexural stress due to the
highest wheel load is greater than the
modulus of rupture, select higher
thickness and redesign
Design the thickness on the basis of
corner stress if no dowel is provided
and there is no load transfer due to lack
of aggregate interlocking
Design Dowel and Tie Bars if necessary
ILLUSTRATION OF IRC 58-2002
DESIGN OF RIGID PAVEMENT
EXAMPLE

Two Lane Two Way Highway
Location: Karnataka State
Total Two Way Traffic = 3000 CVPD
Flexural Strength of Concrete = 45 Kg/Cm
2

Effective K with DLC = 8 Kg / Cm
2

E of Concrete = 3 x 10
5
Kg / Cm
2

Poissons Ratio of Concrete = 0.15
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion of
Concrete = 10x10
-6
/
0
c

Tire Pressure = 8 Kg/Cm
2

Rate of Traffic Growth = 0.075
Spacing of Contraction Joints = 4.5m
Width of the Slab = 3.5m

Single Axle Loads Tandem Axle Loads
Axle Load
Class (t)
% of Axle
Loads
Axle Load
Class (t)
% of Axle
Loads
19-21 0.6 34-38 0.3
17-19 1.5 30-34 0.3
15-17 4.8 26-30 0.6
13-15 10.8 22-26 1.8
11-13 22.0 18-22 1.5
9-11 23.3 14-18 0.5
<9 30.0 <14 2.0
Total 93.0 Total 7.0
Present Traffic = 3000 CVD
Design Life = 20 Years
r = 0.075
Cumulative Repetitions
= 3000*365*[{(1.075)
20
1}/0.075]
= 47,418,626 CV
Design Traffic = 0.25 * 47,418,626
= 11,854,657 CV
Single Axle Loads Tandem Axle Loads
Load in
Tonnes
Expected
Repetitions
Load in
Tonnes
Expected
Repetitions
20 71127 36 35564
18 177820 32 35564
16 569023 28 71128
14 1280303 24 213384
12 2608024 20 177820
10 2762135 16 59273
<10 3556397 <16 237093

Trial Thickness = 32 Cm
Sub-grade Modulus = 8 Kg/Cm
3

Design Period = 20 Years
Modulus of Rupture = 45 Kg/Cm
2

Safety Factor = 1.2

Axle Load
(t)
AL * 1.2 Stress
(Kg/Cm
2
)
Stress
Ratio
Expected
Repetitions
(n)
Fatigue
Life N
Fatigue Life
Consumed
1 2 3 4 5 6 Ratio (5/6)
Single Axle
20 24.0 25.19 0.56 71127 94100 0.76
18 21.6 22.98 0.51 177820 485000 0.37
16 19.2 20.73 0.46 569023 14330000 0.04
14 16.8 18.45 0.41 128030 Infinite 0.00
Tandem Axle
36 43.2 20.07 0.45 35560 62800000 0.0006
32 38.4 18.40 0.40 35560 Infinite

0
Cumulative Fatigue Life Consumed
1.1706
Axle
Load (t)
AL *
1.2
Stress
(Kg/Cm
2
)
Stress
Ratio
Expected
Repetitions(n)
Fatigue Life
(N)
Fatigue Life
Consumed
1 2 3 4 5 6 Ratio (5/6)
Single Axle
20 24.0 24.10 0.53 71127 216000 0.33
18 21.6 21.98 0.49 177820 1290000 0.14
16 19.2 19.98 0.44 569023 Infinity 0.00
14 16.8 17.64 0.39 128030 Infinity 0.00
Tandem Axle
36 43.2 19.38 0.43 35560 Infinity 0.00
Cumulative Fatigue Life Consumed 0.47
Trial Thickness = 33 Cm

Check for Temperature Stress

Edge Warping Stress (S
te
) = E t C / 2.0
= 17.3 Kg/Cm
2

( For L = 450Cm, B = 350 Cm, l = 103.5, L/l = 4.4 & C = 0.55
from Fig. 2 & Temp. Diff. = 21
o
C )

Total of Load (Highest) and Warping Stress = 24.10 + 17.3
= 41.4 Kg/Cm
2

< 45 Kg/Cm
2
Hence Safe


Check for Corner Stress due to Load
S
cl
= (3P/h
2
) * { 1 (a 2/l)
1.2
}

98 Percentile Axle Load is 16 Tonnes
The Wheel Load = 8 Tonnes
Radius of Relative Stiffness( l ) = 103.5 Cm
Radius of Contact of Wheel (a)
(Single Axle Dual Wheel)

a = [0.8521 * (P)/(q*)* (S/ )*{(P) / 0.5227*q}
0.5
]
0.5

P = Load
S = C/c Distance between Two Tires
q = Tire Pressure
a = 26.51 Cm


Corner Stress due to Load = 15.52 Kg/Cm
2

Flex. Strength of Concrete = 45 Kg/Cm
2

Hence the Proposed thickness of 33 Cm is safe
since Corner Stress Due to Load is Less than
the Flexural strength of Concrete
AASHTO DESIGN PROCEDURE
Design of Slab Thickness
Estimate future Traffic
Reliability ( R )
Overall Standard Deviation (S
o
)
Design Serviceability Loss
Concrete Elastic Modulus (E
c
)
Concrete Modulus of Rupture (S
c
)
Load Transfer Coefficient (J)
Drainage Coefficient ( C
d
)
Reliability
Accounts for the changes in variation in both traffic
prediction and performance prediction
50 - 80 50 80 Local
75 - 95 80 95 Collectors
75 - 95 80 99 Principal Arterials
80 99.9 85 - 99.9 Interstate and other
Freeways
Rural Urban
Recommended Levels of Reliability Functional
Classification
Overall Standard Deviation ( So)
Rigid Pavement 0.35
Design Serviceability Loss
PSI Ranges from 5 (Perfect road) to 0
(Impossible Road)
Index of 2.5 for Design of Major Roads and 2.0
for Less Important Roads
Initial Serviceability for Rigid Pavements 4.5

Concrete Elastic Modulus
Concrete Modulus of Rupture
S
c
= S
c
+ Z (SD
s
)
Where S
c
= Estimated mean value for PCC
modulus of rupture (psi)
S
c
= Construction specification on concrete
modulus of rupture
SD
s
= Estimated standard deviation of concrete
modulus of rupture
Z = Standard normal variate
0.841 for PS = 20%
1.037 for PS = 15%
1.282 for PS = 10%
1.645 for PS = 5%
2.327 for PS = 1%
Load Transfer coefficient (J)
Factor accounts for the ability of the
concrete pavement to transfer load
across joints
J = 3.2 for JCP and JRCP, with some
type of load transfer device
J = 3.8 to 4.4 when there is no load
transfer device
PCA DESIGN OF RIGID PAVEMENTS
Flexural strength of Concrete (Modulus of
Rupture M
R
)
Strength of the subgrade or subgrade and
subbase combination (K)
The weights, frequencies and types of truck axles
loads that the pavement will carry
Design period, which in this and other pavement
design procedures is usually taken at 20 years,
but may be more or less
PCA DESIGN PROCEDURE
Type of Joint and Shoulder
Concrete Flexural strength (M
R
) at 28 days
K value of the subgrade or subgrade and
subbase combination
Load safety factor (LSF)
Axle load distribution
Expected number of repetitions
Fatigue analysis to control fatigue cracking
and erosion analysis to control foundation
and shoulder erosion, pumping, and faulting
Fatigue analysis will usually control the
design of light traffic pavements and
medium traffic pavements with doweled
joints
Erosion analysis will usually control the
design of medium and heavy traffic
pavements with undoweled joints and heavy
traffic with doweled joints
For pavements carrying normal mix of truck
types, single-axle loads are usually more severe
in the fatigue analysis, and tandem axle loads are
more severe in the erosion analysis
Fatigue Analysis
Assume Trial Thickness and Equivalent Stress
Factor depending on the Trial Thickness and K
Value
Estimate the Expected and Allowable
Repetitions
The Ratio of Expected to Allowed Should Not
be More than 100%
Erosion Analysis
Assume trial thickness and the equivalent
stress factor depending on the trial
thickness and k value
Estimate the expected and allowable
repetitions
The ratio of expected to allowed should not
be more than 100%

Design of CC Pavement - VRVRLatest

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Design of CC Pavement - VRVRLatest

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Prof.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi