flUBUSttEO 8¥ TH £

AMERICAN ASSOCW'lON CF STATE HIGHW'AY ANO THANSl'ORWlOH OFFICI.A!.S

 PUBLISHED BY THE
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS
 AASHTO Guide for
Design of Pavement Structures
1993

Published by the
American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials

444 N. Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 249

Washington, D.C. 20001

© Copyright, 1986, 1993 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials All Rights Reserved Printed in the United States of America This book, or parts
thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publishers
ISBN 1-56051-055-2
 HIGHWAY SUBCOMMITTEE ON DESIGN

Chairman Byron C Blaschke, Texas

Vice Chairman. Kenneth C Afferton, New Jersey
Secretary. Thomas W illett, FHWA

Alabama, Don Arkle, Ray D Bass, J F Caraway Oklahoma, Bruce E Taylor, Richard B Hankins,
Alaska, Rodney R Platzke, Timothy Mitchell, Boyd C Wayne Philliber
Brownfield Oregon, Tom Lulay, Wayne F Cobine
Arizona, Robert P Mickelson, Dallis B Saxton, Pennsylvania, Fred W Bowser, John J Faiella, Jr ,
John L Louis Dean Schreiber
Arkansas, Bob Walters, Paul DeBusk Puerto Rico, Jose E Hernandez, Maria M Casse,
California, Walter P Smith Eugenio Davila
Colorado, James E Siebels Rhode Island, J Michael Bennett
Connecticut, Earle R Munroe, Bradley J Smith, South Carolina, Robert L White, William M DuBose
James F Byrnes, Jr South Dakota, Lawrence L Weiss, Larry Engbrecht,
Delaware, Michael A Angelo, Chao H Hu Monte Schneider
D.C., Charles F Williams, Sanford H Vinick Tennessee, Paul Morrison, Clellon Loveall,
Florida, Bill Deyo, Ray Reissener Jerry D Hughes
Georgia, Walker Scott, Hoyt J Lively, Roland Hinners Texas, Frank D Holzmann, William A Lancaster,
Hawaii, Kenneth W G Wong, Albert Yamaguchi Mark Marek
Idaho, Richard Sorensen, Jeff R Miles U.S. DOT, Robert Bates (FAA), Thomas O Willett
Illinois, Ken Lazar, Dennis Pescitelli (FHWA)
Indiana, Gregory L Henneke Utah, Dyke LeFevre, P K Mohanty, Heber Vlam
Iowa, George F Sisson, Donald L East, Dave Little Vermont, Robert M Murphy, Donald H Lathrop,
Kansas, Bert Stratmann, James Brewer, John L Armstrong
Richard G Adams Virginia, E C Cochran, J r , R E Atherton, K F Phillips
Kentucky, Charles S Raymer, John Sacksteder, Washington, E R (Skip) Burch
Steve Williams West Virginia, Norman Roush, Randolph Epperly
Louisiana, Charles M Higgins, William Hickey, Wisconsin, Joseph W Dresser, Robert Pfeiffer
Nick Kalivado Wyoming, Donald A Carlson
Maine, Charles Smith, Walter Henrickson
M aryland, Steve Drumm, Robert D Douglass AFFILIATE MEMBERS
Massachusetts, Sherman Eidelman, Alberta, P F (Peter) Tajcnar
Frederick J Nohelty, Jr Hong Kong, S K Kwei
Michigan, Charles J Arnold Manitoba, A Boychuk
Minnesota, Roger M Hill M ariana Islands, Nick C Sablan
Mississippi, Irving Harris, Wendel T Ruff, New Brunswick, C Herbert Page
Glenn Calloway Newfoundland, Terry McCarthy
Missouri, Frank Carroll, Bob Sfreddo Northwest Territories, Peter Vician
M ontana, David S Johnson, Ronald E Williams, Nova Scotia, Donald W Macintosh
Carl S Peil Ontario, Gerry McMillan
Nebraska, Gerald Grauer, Marvin J Volf, Saskatchewan, Ray Gerbrandt
Eldon D Poppe
Nevada, Michael W McFall, Steve R Oxoby ASSOCIATE M EM BERS-STATE
New Hampshire, Gilbert S Rogers
New Jersey, Kenneth Afferton, Walter W Caddell, Mass. Metro. Dist. Comm., E Leo Lydon
N.J. Turnpike Authority, Arthur A Linfante, Jr
Charles A Goessel
Port Auth. of NY & NJ, Harry Schmerl
New Mexico, Joseph Pacheco, Charles V P Trujillo
New York, J Robert Lambert, Philip J Clark,
Robert A Dennison ASSOCIATE M EM BERS-FEDERAL
North Carolina, D R (Don) Morton, G T (Tom) Bureau of Indian Affairs—Division of
Rearin, J T Peacock, Jr Transportation, Kimo Natewa
North Dakota, David K O Leer, Ken Birst U.S. Department of Agriculture—Forest Service,
Ohio, Donald K Huhman, George L Butzer Tom Pettigrew
 JOINT TASK FORCE ON PAVEMENTS

Region 1 Members Representatives

Connecticut Charles Dougan
New York Wes Yang
Pennsylvania Dennis Morian
Port Authority of NY & NJ Harry Schmerl
FHWA Louis M Papet (Secretary)

Region 2
Arkansas Robert L Walters (Vice Chairman)
Florida William N Lofroos
Louisiana J B Esnard, Jr
North Carolina Ken Creech Tom Hearne

Region 3
Illinois John Ebers
Iowa George Sisson Brain McWaters
Missouri Frank L Carroll Danny Davidson
Ohio Aric Morse

Region 4
California Bob Doty
Oregon Ira J Huddleston
Texas James L Brown (Chairman)
Utah Les Jester Wade Betenson
Washington Newt Jackson
Wyoming Tom Atkinson Don Carlson

Representing
Transportation Research Board Daniel W Dearsaugh, Jr , Senior Program Officer
Standing Committee on Planning Fred Van Kirk, West Virginia
Subcommittee on Construction Dean M Testa, Kansas
Subcommittee on Maintenance Robert W Moseley, Mississippi
Subcommittee on Materials Larry Epley, Kentucky
Standing Committee on Aviation Robert Bates, FAA; Roger H Barcus, Illinois;
Craig Smith, South Dakota
 SPECIAL NOTICE

The Guide fo r Design o f Pavement Structures, when it was published in 1986, was pub­
lished as two volumes Volume 1 was written as a basic design guide and provided all of the
information required to understand and apply the “ Guide” to pavement design Volume 2 was
a series of appendices prepared to provide documentation or further explanations for informa­
tion contained in Volume 1 Volume 2 is not required for design
This 1993 edition of the “ Guide” contains only one Volume This Volume replaces the
1986 “ Guide” Volume 1 and serves the same purpose The major changes included in the
1993 “ Guide” are changes to the overlay design procedure and the accompanying appendices
L, M, and N There are other minor changes and some of an editorial nature throughout the
new Volume 1.
Volume 2 of the 1986 “ Guide” is still applicable to most sections of Volume 1 of the 1993
“ Guide” and is available through AASHTO, 444 N Capitol Street, N W , Suite 249, Wash­
ington, D C 20001; 202-624-5800 Request book code “ GDPS3-V2 ” A copy of the Table of
Contents from Volume 2 of the 1986 “ Guide” follows

VOLUME 2 APPENDICES

AA Guidelines for the Design of Highway Internal Drainage Systems

BB Position Paper on Pavement Management
CC Remaining Life Considerations in Overlay Design
DD Development of Coefficients for Treatment of Drainage
EE Development of Reliability
FF Relationship Between Resilient Modulus and Soil Support
GG Relationships Between Resilient Modulus and Layer Coefficients
HH Development of Effective Roadbed Soil Moduli
II Survey of Current Levels of Reliability
JJ Development of Design Nomographs
KK Determination of J-Factor for Undowelled Pavements
LL Development of Models for Effects of Subbase and Loss of Support
MM Extension of Equivalency Factor Tables
NN Recommendations for the Selection of an AASHTO Overlay
Method Using NDT Within the AASHTO Performance
Model Framework
OO Pavement Recycling Fundamentals
PP Development of NDT Structural Capacity Relationships

v
 PREFACE

When construction, maintenance, and rehabilita­ (11) Extension of Load Equivalency Values
tion costs are considered, the single most costly ele­ (12) Improved Traffic Data
ment of our nation’s highway system is the pavement
structure In an effort to reduce this cost, the state (13) Design of Pavements for Low
highway and transportation departments and the Fed­ Volume Roads
eral Government have sponsored a continuous pro­ (14) State of the Knowledge on Mechanistic-
gram of research on pavements One output of that Empirical Design Concepts
research effort was the Interim Guide fo r the Design o f
Pavement Structures published in 1972 and revised in The Task Force recognizes that a considerable body
1981 It was based largely upon the findings at the of information exists to design pavements utilizing
AASHO Road Test so-called mechanistic models It further believes that
Because this is such an important topic, the Joint significant improvements in pavement design will
Task Force on Pavements—composed of members occur as these mechanistic models are calibrated to
from the Subcommittee on Design, one member each in-service performance, and are incorporated in
from the Materials, Construction, and Maintenance everyday design usage Part IV of this document sum­
Subcommittees, and one from the Planning Commit­ marizes the mechanistic/empirical status
tee of AASHTO—was assigned the task of rewriting In order to provide state-of-the-art approaches
the Interim Guide incorporating new developments without lengthy research, values and concepts are
and specifically addressing pavement rehabilitation shown that have limited support in research or experi­
Because many states were found to be using at least ence Each user should consider this to be a reference
portions of the Interim Guide and because no other document and carefully evaluate his or her need of
generally accepted procedures could be identified, it each concept and what initial values to use To most
was decided that this Guide would retain the basic effectively use the Guide it is suggested that the user
algorithms developed from the AASHO Road Test as adopt a process similar to the following:
used in the Interim Guide Because the Road Test was
very limited in scope, i e a few materials, one sub­ (1) Conduct a sensitivity study to determine which
grade, non-mixed traffic, one environment, etc , the inputs have a significant effect on pavement
original Interim Guide contained many additional design answers for its range of conditions
models to expand the framework so designers could (2) For those inputs that are insignificant or inap­
consider other conditions The new Guide has been propriate, no additional effort is required
further expanded with the following 14 major new
considerations (3) For those that are significant and the state has
sufficient data or methods to estimate design
( 1) Reliability values with adequate accuracy, no additional
Resilient Modulus for Soil Support effort is required
(2)
(3) Resilient Modulus for Flexible Pavement (4) Finally, for those sensitive inputs for which the
Layer Coefficients state has no data of methodology to develop the
inputs, research will be necessary Because of
(4) Drainage
the complexity of pavement design and the
(5) Improved Environment Considerations large expansion of this Guide, it is anticipated
(6) Tied Concrete Shoulders or Widened Lanes that some additional research will be cost-
(7) Subbase Erosion for Rigid Pavements effective for each and every user agency in or­
der to optimally utilize the Guide
(8) Life Cycle Cost Considerations
(9) Rehabilitation One significant event, the pavement performance
(10) Pavement Management research effort being undertaken in the Strategic High­
way Research Program (SHRP), should aid greatly in Finally, the national trend toward developing and
improving this document implementing pavement management systems, PMS,
The Task Force believes that pavement design is appears to the Task Force to be extremely important in
gradually, but steadily transitioning from an art to a developing the good judgment needed by pavement
science However, when one considers the nebulous designers as well as providing many other elements
nature of such difficult, but important inputs to design needed for good design, i e information to support
considerations such as traffic forecasting, weather adequate funding and fund allocation
forecasting, construction control, maintenance prac­
tices, etc , successful pavement design will always de­
pend largely upon the good judgment of the designer The AASHTO Joint Task Force on Pavements
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

One of the major objectives of the AASHO Road 1 Reliability. The procedure for design of both
Test was to provide information that could be used to rigid and flexible pavements provides a com­
develop pavement design criteria and pavement design mon method for incorporating a reliability fac­
procedures Accordingly, following completion of the tor into the design based on a shift in the
Road Test, the AASHO Design Committee (currently design traffic
the AASHTO Design Committee), through its Sub- 2 Soil support value AASHTO test method
committee on Pavement Design Practices, developed T 274 (resilient modulus of roadbed soils) is
and circulated in 1961 the “AASHO Interim Guide for recommended as the definitive test for charac­
the Design of Rigid and Flexible Pavements ” The terizing soil support The soil property is rec­
Guide was based on the results of the AASHO Road ommended for use with both flexible and rigid
Test supplemented by existing design procedures and, pavement design
in the case of rigid pavements, available theory 3 Layer coefficients (flexible pavements) The
After the Guide had been used for several years, resilient modulus test has been recommended
the AASHTO Design Committee prepared and as the procedure to be used in assigning layer
AASHTO published the “AASHTO Interim Guide for coefficients to both stabilized and unstabilized
Design of Pavement Structures—1972 ” Revisions material
were made in 1981 to Chapter III of the Guide relative [Note Guidelines for relating resilient
to design criteria for Portland Cement Concrete pave­ modulus to soil support value and layer coeffi­
ments Evaluation of the Guide by the AASHTO De­ cients are provided in the Guide, however, user
sign Committee in 1983 led to the conclusion that agencies are encouraged to obtain equipment
some revisions and additions were required Repre­ and to train personnel in order to measure the
sentations from government, industry, consultants,
resilient modulus directly ]
and academia led to the conclusion that the Guide ^
Drainage Provision has been made in the
should be strengthened to incorporate information de­
Guide to provide guidance in the design of sub­
veloped since 1972 and that a new section on rehabili­
surface drainage systems and for modifying
tation should be added It is also pertinent to note that,
the design equations to take advantage of im­
based on responses to a questionnaire sent to the
provements in performance to good drainage
States, there was an indication that the Guide was
Environment Improvements in the Guide have
serving its main objectives and no serious problems
been made in order to adjust designs as a func­
were indicated In other words, the States were gener­
tion of environment, e g , frost heave, swelling
ally satisfied with the Guide but acknowledged that
soils, and thaw-weakening Major emphasis is
some improvements could be made
Based on the overall evaluation of input from user given to thaw-weakening and the effect that
agencies and the status of research, it was determined seasonal variations have on performance
by the AASHTO Joint Task Force on Pavements that ^ Tied shoulders and widened lanes (rigid pave­
the revisions to the Guide would retain the AASHO ments) A procedure is provided for the design
Road Test performance prediction equations, as modi­ of rigid pavements with tied shoulders or wid­
fied for use in the 1972 Guide, as the basic model to ened outside lanes
be used for pavement design This determination also ^ Subbase erosion A method for adjusting the
established the present serviceability index (PSI) as design equations to represent possible soil ero­
the performance variable upon which design would be sion under rigid pavements is provided
based 8 Life-cycle costs Information has been added
The major changes which have been included in the relative to economic analysis and economic
revised Guide include the following considerations: comparisons of alternate designs based on life-
 cycle costs Present worth and/or equivalent 12 Traffic Extensive information concerning
uniform annual cost evaluations during a spec­ methods for calculating equivalent single axle
ified analysis period are recommended for loads and specific problems related to obtain­
making economic analyses ing reliable estimates of traffic loading are
9 Rehabilitation A major addition to the Guide provided
is the inclusion of a section on rehabilitation 13 Low-volume roads A special category for
Information is provided for rehabilitation with design of pavements subjected to a relative
or without overlays small number of heavy loads is provided in the
10 Pavement management Background informa­ design section
tion is provided regarding pavement manage­ 14 Mechanistic-Empirical design procedure The
ment and the role of the Guide in the overall state of the knowledge concerning mechanis­
scheme of pavement management tic-empirical design concepts is provided in
the Guide While these procedures have not, as
11 Load equivalency values Load equivalency
yet, been incorporated into the Guides, exten­
values have been extended to include heavier
sive information is provided as to how such
loads, more axles, and terminal serviceability
methods could be used in the future when
levels of up to 3 0
enough documentation can be provided

x
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Preface........................................................................................................................................ vii

Executive S u m m a ry ................................................................................................................... ix

PART I PAVEMENT DESIGN AND MANAGEMENTPRINCIPLES

Chapter 1 Introduction and Background....................................................... 1-3
1.1 Scope of the Guide 1-3
1.2 Design Considerations 1-5
1.3 Pavement Performance 1-7
1.4 Traffic 1-10
1.4.1 Evaluation of Traffic 1-10
1.4.2 Limitations 1-12
1.4.3 Special Cases 1-13
1.5 Roadbed Soil 1-13
1.6 Materials of Construction 1-15
1.6.1 Flexible Pavements 1-16
1.6.2 Rigid Pavements 1-21
1.6.3 Shoulders 1-22
1.7 Environment 1-22
1.8 Drainage 1-27
1.8.1 General Design Considerations 1-28
1.8.2 Design of Pavement Subsurface Drainage 1-28
1.8.3 Incorporation of Drainage Into Guide 1-28
1.9 Shoulder Design 1-29

Chapter 2 Design Related Project Level Pavement Management............ 1-31

2.1 Relationship of Design to Pavement Management 1-31
2.2 The Guide as Structural Subsystem fora State Project-Level PMS 1-34
2.3 Pavement Type Selection 1-39
2.4 Network Level Pavement Management 1-39

Chapter 3 Economic Evaluation of Alternative Pavement Design Strategies. . . . 1-41

3.1 Introduction 1-41
3.2 Life-Cycle Costs 1-41
3.3 Basic Concepts 1-41
3.4 Definitions Related to Economic Analysis 1-42
3.4.1 Transport Improvement Costs 1-42
3.4.2 User Benefits 1-42
3.5 Factors Involved in Pavement Cost and Benefits 1-44
3.6 Initial Capital Costs (Investment Costs) 1-44
3.6.1 Maintenance Cost 1-44
3.6.2 Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Cost 1-44
 Contents—Continued
3.6.3 Salvage or Residual Value 1-45
3.6.4 User Cost 1-45
3.6.5 Traffic Delay Cost to User 1-46
3.6.6 Identification of Pavement Benefit 1-46
3.6.7 Analysis Period 1-46
3.7 Methods of Economic Evaluation 1-47
3.8 Discussion of Interest Rates, Inflation Factors andDiscount Rates 1-47
3.8.1 Discounting and the Opportunity Cost of Capital 1-47
3.8.2 Inflation 1-48
3.9 Equations for Economic Analysis 1-49
3.9.1 Equivalent Uniform Annual Cost Method 1-49
3.9.2 Present Worth Method 1-49
3.9.3 Summary 1-51

Chapter 4 R eliability.......................................................................................................... 1-53

4.1 Definitions 1-53
4.1.1 General Definition of Reliability 1-53
4.1.2 Definition of Design Pavement Section 1-53
4.1.3 Definition of Pavement Condition, Accumulated Axle Loads, and
Pavement Performance Variables 1-54
4.2 Variance Components and Reliability Design Factor 1-56
4.2.1 Components of Pavement Design-Performance Variability 1-56
4.2.2 Probability Distribution of Basic Deviations 1-57
4.2.3 Formal Definition of Reliability Level and Reliability
Design Factor 1-60
4.3 Criteria for Selection of Overall Standard Deviation 1-62
4.4 Criteria for Selection of Reliability Level 1-62
4.5 Reliability and Stage Construction Alternatives 1-63

Chapter 5 Summary...................................................... 1-65

References for Part 1............................................................................................................... 1-67

PART II PAVEMENT DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR

NEW CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION
C h apter 1 In tro d u c tio n ............................................................. ........................................ II-3
1.1 Background II-3
1.2 Scope II-3
1.3 Limitations 11-4
1.4 Organizations 11-4

C h apter 2 Design R equirem ents.............................................. ........................................ II-5

2.1 Design Variables II-5
2.1.1 Time Constraints II-5
2.1.2 Traffic II-6
2.1.3 Reliability II-9
2.1.4 Environmental Effects 11-10
2.2 Performance Criteria 11-10
2.2.1 Serviceability 11-10
2.2.2 Allowable Rutting 11-12
2.2.3 Aggregate Loss 11-12
Contents—Continued
2.3 Material Properties for Structural Design 11-12
2.3.1 Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus 11-12
2.3.2 Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 11-16
2.3.3 Pavement Layer Materials Characterization n -16
2.3.4 PCC Modulus of Rupture 11-16
2.3.5 Layer Coefficients 11-17
2.4 Pavements Structural Characteristics 11-22
2.4.1 Drainage 11-22
2.4.2 Load Transfer 11-25
2.4.3 Loss of Support 11-27
2.5 Reinforcement Variables n-27
2.5.1 Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavements 11-27
2.5.2 Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavements 11-28

C hapter 3 Highway Pavement S tructural D e sig n ...................................... ............... n -3 1

3.1 Flexible Pavement Design 11-31
3.1.1 Determine Required Structural Number 11-31
3.1.2 Stage Construction 11-33
3.1.3 Roadbed Swelling and Frost Heave 11-33
3.1.4 Selection of Layer Thickness 11-35
3.1.5 Layered Design Analysis 11-35
3.2 Rigid Pavement Design 11-37
3.2.1 Develop Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 11-37
3.2.2 Determine Required Slab Thickness 11-44
3.2.3 Stage Construction 11-44
3.2.4 Roadbed Swelling and Frost Heave 11-47
3.3 Rigid Pavement Joint Design 11-48
3.3.1 Joint Types 11-48
3.3.2 Joint Geometry 11-49
3.3.3 Joint Sealant Dimensions 11-50
3.4 Rigid Pavement Reinforcement Design 11-51
3.4.1 Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavements 11-51
3.4.2 Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavements 11-51
3.4.3 Transverse Reinforcement 11-62
3.5 Prestressed Concrete Pavement 11-65
3.5.1 Subbase 11-65
3.5.2 Slab Length 11-65
3.5.3 Magnitude of Prestress 11-66
3.5.4 Tendon Spacing 11-66
3.5.5 Fatigue 11-66
3.5.6 PCP Structural Design 11-66

C h ap ter 4 Low-Volume R oad D e s ig n ........................................................... ............... 11-69

4.1 Design Chart Procedures 11-69
4.1.1 Flexible and Rigid Pavements 11-69
4.1.2 Aggregate-Surfaced Roads 11-69
4.2 Design Catalog 11-77
4.2.1 Flexible Pavement Design Catalog 11-77
4.2.2 Rigid Pavement Design Catalog 11-81
4.2.3 Aggregate-Surfaced Road Design Catalog 11-81

References for P a rt I I ........................................................................................... ............... 11-87

 Contents—Continued
PART III PAVEMENT DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR
REHABILITATION OF EXISTING PAVEMENTS
C h apter 1 In tro d u c tio n ...................................................................................................... III-3
1.1 Background III-3
1.2 Scope III-3
1.3 Assumptions/Limitations III-4
1.4 Organization III-4

C h apter 2 R ehabilitation C o n cep ts.......................................................

2.1 Background III-7
2.2 Rehabilitation Factors III-7
2.2.1 Major Categories III-7
2.2.2 Recycling Concepts III-7
2.2.3 Construction Considerations m -7
2.2.4 Summary of Major Rehabilitation Factors III-7
2.3 Selection of Alternative Rehabilitation Methods III-8
2.3.1 Overview III-8
2.3.2 Problem Definition III-9
2.3.3 Potential Problem Solutions 111-12
2.3.4 Selection of Preferred Solution III-15
2.3.5 Summary III-16

C h ap ter 3 Guides for Field D ata C o lle ctio n .......................................... ................... HI-19
3.1 Overview III-19
3.2 The Fundamental Analysis Unit III-19
3.2.1 General Background III-19
3.2.2 Methods of Unit Delineation III-19
3.3 Drainage Survey for Rehabilitation 111-21
3.3.1 Role of Drainage in Rehabilitation 111-21
3.3.2 Assessing Need for Drainage Evaluation 111-25
3.3.3 Pavement History, Topography, and Geometry III-25
3.3.4 Properties of Materials 111-25
3.3.5 Climatic Zones 111-26
3.3.6 Summary III-28
3.4 Condition (Distress) Survey 111-28
3.4.1 General Background 111-28
3.4.2 Minimum Information Needs III-28
3.4.3 Utilization of Information 111-28
3.5 NDT Deflection Measurement III-30
3.5.1 Overview 111-30
3.5.2 Uses of NDT Deflection Results 111-32
3.5.3 Evaluating the Effective Structural Capacity 111-35
3.5.4 Joint Load Transfer Analysis III-38
3.5.5 Use in Slab-Void Detection 111-44
3.6 Field Sampling and Testing Programs 111-45
3.6.1 Test Types III-45
3.6.2 Major Parameters 111-45
3.6.3 Necessity for Destructive Testing 111-49
3.6.4 Selecting the Required Number of Tests 111-49

xiv
Contents—Continued
Chapter 4 Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay......................................... 111-59
4.1 Evaluation of Pavement Condition III-59
4.1.1 Surface Distress 111-59
4.1.2 Structural Condition III-59
4.1.3 Functional Condition HI-60
4.2 Development of Feasible Alternatives and Strategies 111-60
4.3 Major Nonoverlay Methods III-62
4.3.1 Full-Depth Repair 111-62
4.3.2 Partial-Depth Pavement Repair 111-64
4.3.3 Joint and Crack Sealing III-65
4.3.4 Subsealing of Concrete Pavements III-66
4.3.5 Diamond Grinding of Concrete Surfacesand Cold Milling of
Asphalt Surfaces 111-67
4.3.6 Subdrainage Design 111-68
4.3.7 Pressure Relief Joints III-69
4.3.8 Restoration of Joint Load Transfer in Jointed Concrete Pavements 111-70
4.3.9 Surface Treatments 111-71
4.3.10 Prediction of Life of Rehabilitation Techniques Without Overlay 111-73

Chapter 5 Rehabilitation Methods With O verlays................................................... 111-79

5.1 Overlay Type Feasibility 111-79
5.2 Important Considerations in Overlay Design 111-80
5.2.1 Pre-overlay Repair III-80
5.2.2 Reflection Crack Control HI-80
5.2.3 Traffic Loadings 111-80
5.2.4 Subdrainage III-81
5.2.5 Rutting in AC Pavements 111-81
5.2.6 Milling AC Surface III-81
5.2.7 Recycling the Existing Pavement III-81
5.2.8 Structural versus Functional Overlays III-81
5.2.9 Overlay Materials III-81
5.2.10 Shoulders 111-81
5.2.11 Existing PCC Slab Durability 111-82
5.2.12 PCC Overlay Joints 111-82
5.2.13 PCC Overlay Reinforcement 111-82
5.2.14 PCC Overlay Bonding/Separation Layers 111-82
5.2.15 Overlay Design Reliability Level and Overall Standard Deviation 111-82
5.2.16 Pavement Widening III-82
5.2.17 Potential Errors and Possible Adjustments to Thickness
Design Procedure 111-83
5.2.18 Example Designs and Documentation 111-83
5.3 Pavement Evaluation for Overlay Design 111-83
5.3.1 Design of Overlay Along Project. HI-84
5.3.2 Functional Evaluation of Existing Pavement III-84
5.3.3 Structural Evaluation of Existing Pavement 111-85
5.3.4 Determination of Design MR 111-91
5.4 AC Overlay of AC Pavement HI-94
5.4.1 Feasibility IH-94
5.4.2 Pre-overlay Repair III-94
5.4.3 Reflection Crack Control IH-95
5.4.4 Subdrainage IH-95
5.4.5 Thickness Design IH-95

xv
 Contents—Continued
5.4.6 Surface Milling III-105
5.4.7 Shoulders III-105
5.4.8 Widening III-106
AC Overlay of Fractured PCC Slab Pavement III-106
5.5.1 Feasibility III-107
5.5.2 Pre-overlay Repair III-108
5.5.3 Reflection Crack Control III-108
5.5.4 Subdrainage III-108
5.5.5 Thickness Design III-108
5.5.6 Shoulders III- 111
5.5.7 Widening III-lll
AC Overlay of JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP III-113
5.6.1 Feasibility III-113
5.6.2 Pre-overlay Repair III-113
5.6.3 Reflection Crack Control III-114
5.6.4 Subdrainage III-115
5.6.5 Thickness Design III-115
5.6.6 Shoulders III-125
5.6.7 Widening III-125
AC Overlay of AC/JPCP, AC/JRCP, and AC/CRCP III-125
5.7.1 Feasibility III-125
5.7.2 Pre-overlay Repair III-127
5.7.3 Reflection Crack Control III-127
5.7.4 Subdrainage III-128
5.7.5 Thickness Design III-128
5.7.6 Surface Milling III-135
5.7.7 Shoulders III-135
5.7.8 Widening III-136
Bonded Concrete Overlay of JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP III-136
5.8.1 Feasibility III-136
5.8.2 Pre-overlay Repair III-137
5.8.3 Reflection Crack Control III-137
5.8.4 Subdrainage III-137
5.8.5 Thickness Design III-137
5.8.6 Shoulders III-143
5.8.7 Joints III-143
5.8.8 Bonding Procedures and Material III-145
5.8.9 Widening III-145
Unbonded JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP Overlay of JPCP, JRCP, CRCP,
or AC/PCC III-145
5.9.1 Feasibility III-145
5.9.2 Pre-overlay Repair III-145
5.9.3 Reflection Crack Control III-145
5.9.4 Subdrainage III-146
5.9.5 Thickness Design III-146
5.9.6 Shoulders III-151
5.9.7 Joints III-151
5.9.8 Reinforcement III-153
5.9.9 Separation Interlayers III-153
5.9.10 Widening III-153
JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP Overlay of AC Pavement III-153
5.10.1 Feasibility III-153

xvi
Contents—Continued
5.10.2 Pre-overlay Repair Ill-153
5.10.3 Reflection Crack Control HI-153
5.10.4 Subdrainage III-154
5.10.5 Thickness Design III-154
5.10.6 Shoulders III-155
5.10.7 Joints III-155
5.10.8 Reinforcement III-155
5.10.10 Widening III-155

References for C hapter 5 .............................................. .......................................... m-157

PART IV MECHANISTIC-EMPIRICAL DESIGN PROCEDURES

1.1 Introduction IV-3
1.2 Benefits IV-4
1.3 Framework for Development and Application IV-4
1.4 Implementation IV-7
1.4.1 Design Considerations IV-8
1.4.2 Input Data IV-8
1.4.3 Equipment Acquisition IV-9
1.4.4 Computer Hardware and Software IV-9
1.4.5 Training Personnel IV-9
1.4.6 Field Testing and Calibration IV-10
1.4.7 Testing IV -10
1.5 Summary IV-10

References for P art I V ....................................................... ............................................... IV-11

APPENDICES
A. Glossary of Terms A1
B. Pavement Type Selection Guidelines B1
C. Alternate Methods of Design for Pavement Structures Cl
D. Conversion of Mixed Traffic to Equivalent Single Axle Loads for
Pavement Design D1
E. Position Paper on Shoulder Design El
F. List of Test Procedures FI
G. Treatment of Roadbed Swelling and/or Frost Heave in Design G1
H. Flexible Pavement Design Example HI
I. Rigid Pavement Design Example 11
J. Analysis Unit Delineation by Cumulative Differences J1
K. Typical Pavement Distress Type-Severity Descriptions K1
L. Documentation of Design Procedures LI
M. An Examination of the AASHTO Remaining Life Factor Ml
N. Overlay Design Examples N1

Index 1

xvii
 PART I
PAVEMENT DESIGN AND
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 SCOPE OF THE GUIDE rials which are to be stabilized for use in the pavement
structure or prepared roadbed
This Guide fo r the Design o f Pavement Structures Part I of this Guide has been prepared as general
provides a comprehensive set of procedures which can background material to assist the user in the proper
be used for the design and rehabilitation of pavements; interpretation of the design procedures and to provide
both rigid (portland cement concrete surface) and an understanding of the concepts used in the develop­
flexible (asphalt concrete surface) and aggregate sur­ ment of the Guide Detailed information related di­
faced for low-volume roads The Guide has been de­ rectly to a number of design considerations, e g ,
veloped to provide recommendations regarding the reliability, drainage, life-cycle costs, traffic, and pave­
determination of the pavement structure as shown in ment type selection, will be found in the Appendices
Figure 1 1 These recommendations will include the References used in the preparation of the Guide can be
determination of total thickness of the pavement struc­ found following each of the four major Parts
ture as well as the thickness of the individual struc­ Part I, Chapter 3 of the Guide provides information
tural components The procedures for design provide concerning economic evaluation of alternate pavement
for the determination of alternate structures using a design strategies It should not be concluded that the
variety of materials and construction procedures selection of a pavement design should be based on
A glossary of terms, as used in this Guide, is pro­ economics alone There are a number of consider­
vided in Appendix A It is recognized that some of the ations involved in the final design selection Appendix
terms used herein may differ from those used in your B of the Guide on pavement type selection provides an
local practice, however, it is necessary to establish extensive list of guidelines which should be used in
standard terminology in order to facilitate preparation comparing alternate design strategies
of the Guide for nationwide use Insofar as is possible, Part II of this Guide provides a detailed method for
AASHTO definitions have been used herein the design of new pavements or for reconstruction of
It should be remembered that the total set of con­ existing pavements on the existing alignment with new
siderations required to assure reliable performance of or recycled materials
a pavement structure will include many factors other Part III of this Guide provides alternative methods
than the determination of layer thicknesses of the for pavement rehabilitation with or without the addi­
structural components For example, material require­ tion of an overlay The methodology used in this part
ments, construction requirements, and quality control of the Guide represents the state of the knowledge
will significantly influence the ability of the pavement regarding the deterioration of a pavement structure
structure to perform according to design expectations before and after an overlay has been applied It is
In other words, “ pavement design” involves more recognized that there are alternate methods for the
than choosing thicknesses Information concerning determination of overlay requirements, a number of
material and construction requirements will be briefly these methods are cited in Appendix C The method
described in this Guide; however, a good pavement included in Part III is somewhat more basic in concept
designer must be familiar with relevant publications of than other existing methods and has the capability for
AASHTO and ASTM, as well as the local agencies, broader application to different types of overlays,
i e , state agencies or counties, for whom the design is e g , flexible on rigid, flexible on flexible, rigid on
being prepared It is extremely important that the rigid, and rigid on flexible type pavements The
designer prepare special provisions to the standard method is also compatible with the performance and
specifications when circumstances indicate that non­ design concepts used in Part II In this way, consider­
standard conditions exist for a specific project Exam­ ation of such factors as drainage, reliability, and
ples of such a condition could involve a roadbed soil traffic is the same for both new and rehabilitated
which is known to be expansive or nonstandard mate­ (overlayed) pavement structures

1-3
 I
•fc.

1 - FILL S L O P E 12 S H O U L D E R BASE
2 - OR I GINAL G R O U N D 13 C R O W N SLOPE
3 DIKE 14 SUBGRADE
4 - SELECTED MA TERIAL O R P R E P A R E D R O A D B E D 15 R O A D B E D SOIL
5 - S H O U L D E R SURFACING 16 PAVEMENT STRUCTURE
6 -SUBBASE 17 S H O U L D E R SLOPE
7 - BASE C O URSE 18 TRAVEL LANES Note: See Figure 1.3 for
8 SURFACE COURSE 19 SHOULDER examples of section with provision

Design of Pavement Structures

9 P A V E M E N T SLAB 20 ROADWAY for subsurface drainage.
10 DITCH S L O P E 21 ROADBED
11 - C U T S L O P E

Structural Design Terms

Figure 1.1. Typical Section for Rigid or Flexible Pavement Structure

Introduction and Background 1-5

State of the art procedures for rehabilitation of It is worth noting again that while the Guide de­
pavement structures without overlay, including drain­ scribes and provides a specific method which can be
age and the use of recycled material, are emphasized used for the determination of alternate design or reha­
in Part III These techniques represent an alternative bilitation recommendations for the pavement struc­
to overlays which can reduce long-term costs and sat­ ture, there are a number of considerations which are
isfy design constraints associated with specific design left to the user for final determination, e g , drainage
situations coefficients, environmental factors, and terminal
As an adjunct to pavement rehabilitation it is im­ serviceability
portant to first determine what is wrong with the exist­ The Guide by its very nature cannot possibly in­
ing pavement structure Details of the method for clude all of the site specific conditions that occur
interpretation of the information are contained in Part in each region of the United States It is therefore
III A procedure for measuring or evaluating the con­ necessary for the user to adapt local experience to the
dition of a pavement is given in Appendix K and use of the Guide For example, local materials and
Reference 1 It is beyond the scope of this Guide to environment can vary over an extremely wide range
discuss further the merits of different methods and within a state and between states
equipment which can be used to evaluate the condition The Guide attempts to provide procedures for eval­
of a pavement However, it is considered essential that uating materials and environment, however, in the
a detailed condition survey be made before a set of case where the Guide is at variance with proven and
plans and specifications are developed for a specific documented local experience, the proven experience
project If at all possible, the designer should partici­ should prevail The designer will need to concentrate
pate in the condition survey In this way, it will be on some aspects o f design which are not always cov­
possible to determine if special treatments or methods ered in detail in the Guide For example, material
may be appropriate for site conditions, specifically, if requirements and construction specifications are not
conditions warrant consideration of detailed investiga­ detailed in this Guide and yet they are an important
tions pertinent to the need for added drainage features consideration in the overall design of a pavement
Part IV of this Guide provides a framework for structure The specifics of joint design and joint spac­
future developments for the design of pavement struc­ ing will need careful consideration The effect of sea­
tures using mechanistic design procedures The bene­ sonal variations on material properties and careful
fits associated with the development of these methods evaluation of traffic for the designed project are de­
are discussed, a summary of existing procedures and a tails which the designer should investigate thoroughly
framework for development are the major concerns of The basic design equations used for flexible and
that portion of the Guide rigid pavements in this Guide are as follows:

Flexible Pavements
1.2 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
logioCWm) = ZR X S„ + 9 36 X logi0(SN + 1)
The method of design provided in this Guide in-
eludes consideration of the following items APSI
logio
4 2 - 1 5
(1) pavement performance,
(2) traffic, 1094
0 40 +
(3) roadbed soil, (SN + I)5 19
(4) materials of construction,
(5) environment, + 2 2,2 X log10(MR) - 8 07 (1 2 1)
(6) drainage,
(7) reliability,
where
(8) life-cycle costs, and
(9) shoulder design
W 18 = predicted number of 18-kip equivalent
Each of these factors is discussed in Part I Parts II, single axle load applications,
III, and IV carry these concepts and procedures for­ ZR = standard normal deviate,
ward and incorporate each into a pavement structure S0 = combined standard error of the traffic
design methodology prediction and performance prediction,
1-6 Design of Pavement Structures

APSI = difference between the initial design Ec = modulus of elasticity (psi) for portland
serviceability index, pG, and the design cement concrete, and
terminal serviceability index, pt, and k = modulus of subgrade reaction (pci)
M r = resilient modulus (psi)
The design nomographs presented in Part II solve
SN is equal to the structural number indicative of the these equations for the structural number (SN) for
total pavement thickness required: flexible pavements and thickness of the pavement slab
for rigid pavements
The structural number is an abstract number ex­
SN = a ^ ! + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3
pressing the structural strength of a pavement required
for given combinations of soil support (MR), total
where traffic expressed in equivalent 18-kip single axle
loads, terminal serviceability, and environment The
aj = ith layer coefficient, required SN must be converted to actual thickness of
D; = ith layer thickness (inches), and surfacing, base and subbase, by means of appropriate
m: = ith layer drainage coefficient layer coefficients representing the relative strength of
the construction materials Average values of layer co­
Rigid Pavements efficients for materials used in the AASHO Road Test
are as follows:

l°gio(Wi8) = ZR X S0 + 7 35 X logi0(D + 1) Asphaltic concrete surface course— 44

Crushed stone base course — 14
APSI
logio Sandy gravel subbase — 11
4 5 - 1 5
- 0 06 + ------
1 624 X 107 The layer coefficients given in Part II are based on
extensive analyses summarized in NCHRP Report
1 + (D + l )846
128, “ Evaluation of AASHTO Guide for Design of
+ (4 22 - 0 32 x pt) Pavement Structures,” (1972) In effect, the layer co­
efficients are based on the elastic moduli MR and have
S' x Cd X (D075 - 1 132)
been determined based on stress and strain calcula­
r n n 7, 18 42 1 tions in a multilayered pavement system Using these
215 63 X J
(Ec/k)° 25_ concepts, the layer coefficient may be adjusted, in­
(12 2) creased, or decreased in order to maintain a constant
value of stress or strain required to provide compara­
ble performance
where Part II details how each of the design consider­
ations are to be treated in selecting the SN value and
W 18 = predicted number of 18-kip equivalent how to decompose SN into layers according to mate­
single axle load applications, rial properties and function, i e , surface, base,
ZR —standard normal deviate, subbase, and so forth The pavement slab thickness, in
S0 = combined standard error of the traffic inches, is provided directly from the design nomo­
prediction and performance prediction, graphs
D = thickness (inches) of pavement slab, It is important to recognize that equations (1 2 1)
APSI = difference between the initial design and (1 2 2) were derived from empirical information
serviceability index, p0, and the design obtained at the AASHO Road Test As such, these
terminal serviceability index, pt, equations represent a best fit to observations at the
S^ = modulus of rupture (psi) for portland Road Test The solution represents the mean value of
cement concrete used on a specific traffic which can be carried given specific inputs In
project, other words, there would be a 50-percent chance that
J = load transfer coefficient used to adjust the actual traffic to terminal serviceability could be
for load transfer characteristics of a more or less than predicted In order to decrease the
specific design, risk of premature deterioration below acceptable
Cd = drainage coefficient, levels of serviceability, a reliability factor is included
Introduction and Background 1-7

in the design process An explanation of the reliability fo r Skid Resistant Pavement Design, which can be
factor is given in Chapter 4 of Part I In order to referred to for information on this subject
properly apply the reliability factor, the inputs to the The structural performance of a pavement relates to
design equation should be the mean value without its physical condition, i e , occurrence of cracking,
adjustment This will be discussed further in Chapter faulting, raveling, or other conditions which would
4 of Part I and in sections of Part II The designer must adversely affect the load-carrying capability of the
remember to use mean values fo r such factors as soil pavement structure or would require maintenance
support, traffic, layer coefficients, drainage coeffi­ The functional performance of a pavement con­
cients, etc Increased reliability will be obtained by cerns how well the pavement serves the user In this
adjustments which are based on uncertainty in each of context, riding comfort or ride quality is the dominant
the design variables as well as traffic characteristic In order to quantify riding comfort, the
Each of the terms used in the design equations is “ serviceability-performance” concept was developed
discussed as necessary in Parts I and II of this Guide by the AASHO Road Test staff in 1957 (3, 4) Since
It is pertinent to note that a few changes have been the serviceability-performance concept is used as the
made in the design equations when compared with the measure of performance for the design equations in
1972 Interim Guide (2) The soil support value has this Guide, an explanation of the concept herein seems
been replaced with MR (flexible) and a drainage coef­ worthwhile
ficient has been added to the rigid equation For the The serviceability-performance concept is based
flexible equation, the structural number (SN) has been on five fundamental assumptions, summarized as
modified by the addition of drainage coefficients and follows (5):
the regional factor (R) has been deleted Lastly, both
(1) Highways are for the comfort and convenience
the rigid and flexible equations have been modified to
of the traveling public (User)
consider both total serviceability loss (p0 — pt), and
(2) Comfort, or riding quality, is a matter of sub­
terminal serviceability
jective lesponse or the opinion of the User
There are two important factors to consider con­
(3) Serviceability can be expressed by the mean of
cerning these equations (1) the equations are predic­
the ratings given by all highway Users and is
tors of the amount of traffic that can be sustained
termed the serviceability rating
before deteriorating to some selected terminal level of
(4) There are physical characteristics of a pave­
serviceability and (2) the basic prediction equations
ment which can be measured objectively and
were developed empirically from field observations at
which can be related to subjective evaluations
the AASHO Road Test with modifications considered
This procedure produces an objective service­
necessary to improve the Guide based on research
ability index
completed during the past 20 years
(5) Performance can be represented by the serv­
There are a number of alternate procedures which
iceability history of a pavement
can be used for the design of pavement structures In
fact, all 50 states have adopted their own design proce­ The serviceability of a pavement is expressed in
dures, many of which are based on past AASHTO terms of the present serviceability index (PSI) The
Guide methods A list of other suitable pavement de­ PSI is obtained from measurements of roughness and
sign procedures is presented in Appendix C distress, e g , cracking, patching and rut depth (flex­
ible), at a particular time during the service life of the
pavement Roughness is the dominant factor in esti­
mating the PSI of a pavement Thus, a reliable method
1.3 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE for measuring roughness is important in monitoring
the performance history of pavements
Current concepts of pavement performance include The specific equations developed at the Road Test
some consideration of functional performance, struc­ to calculate the present serviceability index have been
tural performance, and safety This Guide is primarily modified by most users of the AASHTO Guide These
concerned with functional and structural perform­ changes reflect local experience and are assumed to
ance Information pertinent to safety can be found in represent results from the Road Test, i e , the PSI
appropriate publications of NCHRP, FHWA, and values continue to represent ride quality as evaluated
AASHTO One important aspect of safety is the fric­ at the Road Test Because of the relatively small con­
tional resistance provided at the pavement/tire inter­ tribution to PSI made by physical distress, and the
face AASHTO has issued a publication, Guidelines difficulty in obtaining the information, many agencies
 I

1-8 Design o f Pavement Structures

rely only on roughness to estimate ride quality It is however, in most cases, age (time) is a net negative
acknowledged that physical distress is likely to influ­ factor and works to reduce serviceability
ence a decision to initiate maintenance or rehabilita­ An effort has been made in the Guide to account for
tion For purposes of this Guide, it is assumed that the the effects of environment on pavement performance
amount of distress associated with the terminal PSI is in situations where swelling clay or frost heave are
acceptable encountered Thus, the total change in PSI at any time
Because roughness is such an important consider­ can be obtained by summing the damaging effects of
ation for the design of pavements, the change in traffic, swelling clay, and/or frost heave, as shown in
roughness will control the life cycle of pavements In Equation 1 3 1 and illustrated in Figure 1 2
this regard, the quality of construction will influence
performance and the life cycle of the designed pave­
ment The initial pavement smoothness is an impor­ APSI = APSITraffic + APSISwe|i/Frost Heavc (1 3 1)
tant design consideration For example, the life cycle
of a pavement initially constructed with a smoothness
or PSI of 4 5 will have a significantly longer life cycle
where
than one constructed to a PSI of 4 0 Thus, quality
control in the construction of a pavement can have a
beneficial impact on performance (life cycle) APSI = total loss of serviceability,
The scale for PSI ranges from 0 through 5, with a APSIXraffic = serviceability loss due to traffic
value of 5 representing the highest index of service­ (ESAL’s), and
ability For design it is necessary to select both an APSISweu/Frost Heave = serviceability loss due to
initial and terminal serviceability index swelling and/or frost heave of roadbed
The initial serviceability index (pi) is an estimate soil
by the user of what the PSI will be immediately after
construction Values of p; established for AASHO
It can be noted in Figure 1 2 that the effect of
Road Test conditions were 4 2 for flexible pavements
swelling soils or frost heave is to reduce the predicted
and 4 5 for rigid pavements Because of the variation
service life of the pavement The Guide does not rec­
of construction methods and standards, it is recom­
ommend increasing pavement structural thickness to
mended that more reliable levels be established by
offset the serviceability loss due to swelling soils,
each agency based on its own conditions
but it is feasible, however, to control frost heave by
The terminal serviceability index (pt) is the lowest
increasing the thickness of non-frost-susceptible
acceptable level before resurfacing or reconstruction
becomes necessary for the particular class of highway material
An index of 2 5 or 3 0 is often suggested for use in the In many swelling situations, it may be possible to
design of major highways, and 2 0 for highways with a reduce to acceptable limits the effect of swelling soil
lower classification For relatively minor highways, by stabilization of the expansive soil or by replace­
where economic considerations dictate that initial ment of these soils with nonexpansive material When
expenditures be kept low, at pt of 1 5 may be used experience indicates this is a viable procedure, it is
Expenditures may also be minimized by reducing the not necessary to estimate the effect of swelling soil on
performance period Such a low value of pt should the life cycle
only be used in special cases on selected classes of The predicted effect of frost heave is based on a
highways limited amount of information available in the litera­
The major factors influencing the loss of service­ ture If agency design procedures include provisions
ability of a pavement are traffic, age, and environ­ to mitigate the detrimental effects of frost, the service­
ment Each of these factors has been considered in ability loss due to frost heave should be ignored, i e ,
formulating the design requirements included in this assumed to be zero The most accepted procedure to
Guide However, it should be recognized that the sep­ minimize the effect of frost heave is to replace the
arate or the interacting effects of these components are frost-susceptible material with non-frost-susceptible
not clearly defined at the present time, especially with material to a depth of one-half or more of the frost
regard to age It is known that the properties of materi­ depth
als used for pavement construction change with time A further discussion of the influence of environ­
These changes may be advantageous to performance, ment will be found in Section 1 7 of this chapter
Introduction and Background 1-9

Figure 1.2. Pavement Performance Trends

1-10 Design of Pavement Structures

1.4 TRAFFIC the loads given above are also extrapolations of the
basic data from the Road Test
Traffic information required by the design equa­ It should be noted that load equivalency factors are,
tions used in this Guide includes axle loads, axle con­ to a minor degree, functions of pavement type (rigid
figuration, and number of applications or flexible), thickness, and terminal serviceability (pt)
The results of the AASHO Road Test have shown used for design For designing composite pavements
that the damaging effect of the passage of an axle of (rigid base with flexible wearing surface), the use of
any mass (commonly called load) can be represented load equivalency values for rigid pavements is recom­
by a number of 18-kip equivalent single axle loads or mended
ESAL’s For example, one application of a 12-kip State DOT’s accumulate traffic information in the
single axle was found to cause damage equal to ap­ format of the Federal Highway Administration W-4
proximately 0 23 applications of an 18-kip single axle truck weight tables, which are tabulations of the num­
load, and four applications of a 12-kip single axle ber of axles observed within a series of load groups
were required to cause the same damage (or reduction with each load group covering a 2-kip interval Traffic
in serviceability) as one application of an 18-kip sin­ information relative to truck type, i e , axle configu­
gle axle This concept has been applied to the design ration, is provided in W-2 tabulations (distribution of
equations and nomographs in Part II The determina­ vehicles counted and weighed) As illustrated in Ap­
tion of design ESAL’s is a very important consider­ pendix D, these tabulations can be used to estimate the
ation for the design of pavement structures using this number of equivalent single axle loads associated with
Guide, as it is in previous versions of the Guide mixed traffic at the particular reporting loadometer
station From this information it is possible to obtain
average load equivalency factors for all tiucks or for
trucks by configuration, i e , the averages for singles,
1.4.1 Evaluation of Traffic tandems, or tridems
Most states have taken the information from the
The procedure used in this Guide to convert a W-4 tables and converted it into relatively simple mul­
mixed traffic stream of different axle loads and axle tipliers (truck equivalency factors) which represent
configurations into a design traffic number is to con­ each truck type in the traffic stream These multipliers
vert each expected axle load into an equivalent num­ can be used to convert mixed streams of traffic to
ber of 18-kip single axle loads and to sum these over ESAL’s It must be realized that such conversions rep­
the design period The procedure for converting resent estimates when applied to highways other than
mixed traffic to ESAL’s is discussed in Appendix D those from which the data were obtained Weigh sta­
There are four key considerations which influence tion information represents only a sample of the total
the accuracy of traffic estimates and which can signifi­ traffic stream with weighings at a limited number of
cantly influence the life cycle of a pavement: (1) the locations and for limited periods of time Such infor­
correctness of the load equivalency values used to esti­ mation must be carefully interpreted when applied to
mate the relative damage induced by axle loads of specific projects Results from different weigh sta­
different mass and configurations, (2) the accuracy of tions in one state have been reported to produce truck
traffic volume and weight information used to repre­ factors which vary by a factor of 6 Thus, one source
sent the actual loading projections, (3) the prediction of error in ESAL predictions is the use of estimated
of ESAL’s over the design period, and (4) the interac­ truck equivalency factors for various classes of high­
tion of age and traffic as it affects changes in PSI ways based on a relatively small sample Increased
The available load equivalency factors are consid­ sampling of this type of information is necessary in
ered the best available at the present time, represent­ order to reduce the error of the estimate due to insuffi­
ing information derived from the AASHO Road Test cient information on a specific project Users of this
The empirical observations on the Road Test covered a Guide are urged to gather the best possible traffic data
range of axle loads from 2 to 30 kips on single axles for each design project
and 24 to 48 kips on tandem axles No tridem axles Since pavements, new or rehabilitated, are usually
were included in the Road Test experiment, load designed for periods ranging from 10 years to 20 years
equivalency values for tridem axles are included in or more, it is necessary to predict the ESAL’s for this
Appendix D, but they are the result of research carried period of time, i e , the performance period The
out since completion of the Road Test Load equiva­ performance period, often referred to as the design
lency values for single and tandem axles which exceed period, is defined as the period of time that an initial
Introduction and Background I-11

(or rehabilitated structure) will last before reaching its (performance) period The number of ESAL’s may or
terminal serviceability Any performance period may may not be proportional to the average daily traffic
be used with the Guide since design is based on the Truck traffic is the essential information required to
total numbei of equivalent single axle loads; however, calculate ESAL’s, it is therefore very important to
experience may indicate a practical upper limit based correctly estimate future truck traffic for the facility
on considerations other than traffic The ESAL’s for during the design period
the performance period represent the cumulative num­ Traffic may remain constant or increase according
ber from the time the roadway is opened to traffic to to a straight line or at an accelerating (exponential)
the time when the serviceability is reduced to a termi­ rate In most cases, highways classified as principal
nal value (e g , p, equal 2 5 or 2 0) If the traffic is arterial or interstate will have exponential growth
underestimated, the actual time to pt will probably be (comparable to compound interest on investments)
less than the predicted performance period, thereby Traffic on some minor arterial or collector-type high­
resulting in increased maintenance and rehabilitation ways may increase along a straight line, while traffic
costs on some residential streets may not change because
The maximum performance period to be used in the use remains constant Thus, the designer must
designing for a particular pavement type, i e , flex­ make provision for growth in traffic from the time of
ible, rigid, or composite, should reflect agency ex­ the last traffic count or weighing through the perform­
perience ance period selected for the project under consider­
The performance period and corresponding design ation Appendix D provides appropriate information
traffic should reflect real-life experience The per­ for estimating future traffic growth based on an as­
formance period should not be confused with pave­ sumed exponential compounded growth rate If zero
ment life The pavement life may be extended by or negative growth in traffic is anticipated, a zero or
periodic rehabilitation of the surface or pavement negative growth factor can be used In most cases,
structure appropriate growth factors can be selected from the
The equivalent loads derived from many traffic table in Appendix D For major arterials and interstate
prediction procedures represent the totals for all lanes highways, the growth rate should be applied by truck
for both directions of travel This traffic must be dis­ class rather than to the total traffic since growth in
tributed by direction and by lanes for design purposes truck traffic may differ from the total traffic stream
Directional distribution is usually made by assigning The percent trucks for the design period is often
50 percent of the traffic to each direction, unless avail­ assumed to be constant, yet on some sections of the
able measured traffic data warrant some other distri­ interstate system, the truck traffic in rural areas has
bution In regard to lane distribution, 100 percent of been reported to increase from an estimated 6 percent
the traffic in one direction is often assigned to each of to 25 to 30 percent over a 10- to 20-year period
the lanes in that direction for purposes of structural The load equivalency factor increases approxi­
design if measured distributions are not available mately as a function of the ratio of any given axle load
Some states have developed lane distribution factors to the standard 18-kip single axle load raised to the
for facilities with more than one lane in a given direc­ fourth power For example, the load equivalency of a
tion These factors vary from 60 to 100 percent of the 12-kip single axle is given as 0 19 (Appendix D),
one-directional traffic, depending on the total number while the load equivalency for 20-kip single axle is
of lanes in the facility Part II and Appendix D provide 151 Thus, the 20-kip load is 8 times as damaging as
more details pertinent to this lane distribution factor the 12-kip load, i e , (20/12)4 This relationship will
Traffic information is often provided to the de­ vary depending on the structural number and terminal
signer by a Planning or Traffic group The designers serviceability, however, it is generally indicative of
should work closely with traffic personnel to be sure load effects Thus, it is especially important to obtain
the proper information is provided and that the conse­ reliable truck weight information for each truck class
quences of poor estimates of present and future traffic and especially for the multi-axle trucks since these
are understood by all personnel involved vehicles will constitute a high percentage of the total
Predictions of future traffic are often based on past ESAL’s on most projects
traffic history Several factors can influence such pre­ Calculation of future ESAL’s is often based on
dictions truck factors by truck class For example, based on
For purposes of pavement structure design, it is truck weight information for five-axle tractor and
necessary to estimate the cumulative number of 18-kip trailer units, it is possible to develop an average multi­
equivalent single axle loads (ESAL’s) for the design plier for each five-axle truck Thus, if the designer
1-12 Design o f Pavement Structures

can estimate the number of five-axle trucks over the ESAL’s and actual ESAL’s The standard deviation of
design period, it is possible to calculate the cumula­ the relationship between predicted and actual traffic
tive ESAL’s due to this particular truck class A simi­ has been reported (27) to be on the order of 0 2 In
lar procedure is described in Appendix D for most of effect, the actual traffic may be 1 6 (one standard
the truck classes on the highways at the present time deviation) to 4 0 times (three standard deviations) as
In regard to the use of truck factors, it will be much as predicted It should be clear that improve­
important to use truck weight information representa­ ments in traffic loading information and predictions
tive of the truck traffic on the designed facility Some will contribute significantly to the precision which
truck weight data indicate that truck weights can vary can be achieved in thickness design
by a factor of six or more between weigh stations Detailed information and procedures for calculat­
Thus, it is very important to obtain information as ing ESAL’s are given in Appendix D Designs in Part
nearly site specific as possible when estimating II take into consideration the uncertainty in traffic
ESAL’s per truck for each truck classification estimates The designer must use the best estimate for
Procedures described in Appendix D may be traffic without any adjustment based on his or her
applied to stage-construction design, i e , where the interpretation of the accuracy of such information
initial design (performance) period is varied in order Provision has been made in the treatment of reliability
to consider alternative designs for economic com­ in Part II to accommodate the overall effect of vari­
parisons ances in the cumulative axle load predictions and
It should be clear from this discussion that the esti­ other design- and performance-related factors
mate or prediction of future traffic (ESAL’s) is not a
trivial problem Poor estimates of traffic can produce
pavement performance significantly different than 1.4.2 Limitations
that expected and cause a major increase in the cost of
the specific project This increased cost, when applied It is pertinent to note that the load equivalency fac­
to all sections being designed by an agency, will ad­ tors used in this Guide are based on observations at
versely affect the overall programming of highway the AASHO Road Test in Ottawa, Illinois In this re­
projects and reduce the work which can be done gard some limitations should be recognized, such as
Future deregulation or relaxation of truck loads (1) limited pavement types, (2) loads and load applica­
could also result in changes in the load distributions tions, (3) age, and (4) environment
by truck class, possibly resulting in an increased per­ The pavement types at the AASHO Road Test,
centage of five-axle (or more) vehicles being used from which load equivalency values were derived,
Also, inflation pressures used in truck tires are in­ included conventional flexible construction, i e , sur­
creasing as tire manufacturers improve their technol­ face, base and subbase, and rigid pavements with and
ogy and the truck industry evaluates the potential without reinforcement but always with load transfer
advantage of using higher inflation tires It is not devices (dowels) The same load equivalency factors
known exactly what the net effect of higher tire infla­ are being applied in this Guide to (1) flexible pave­
tion is; however, pavement engineers and designers ments with stabilized base and subbase, (2) rigid pave­
need to keep apprised of possible changes which can ments without dowels in the transverse joints, and
influence pavement performance (3) continuously reinforced concrete pavements Mod­
In summary, reliable information concerning cu­ ifications to the load equivalency values can only
mulative ESAL’s is important for the determination of come through controlled experiments The values
pavement structure requirements for both new con­ used in this Guide are considered the best available at
struction and for rehabilitation Continuous monitor­ the present time
ing of traffic on selected routes to compare predicted The experimental design at the AASHO Road Test
and actual traffic loadings is an important and vital set included a wide range of loads as previously discussed
of information needed to produce reliable designs (Section 1 4 1); however, the applied loads were lim­
The reliability factor included in the Guide (Part I, ited to a maximum of 1,114,000 axle applications for
Chapter 4 and Volume 2, Appendix EE) has been those sections which survived the full trafficking per­
developed to provide consideration of uncertainties in iod Thus, the maximum number of 18-kip equivalent
both traffic predictions and performance predictions single axle loads (ESAL’s) applied to any test section
Investigations by several states and industry have pro­ was approximately one million However, by applying
vided some information concerning the uncertainties the concept of equivalent loads to test sections sub­
in traffic predictions, i e , comparison of predicted jected to only 30-kip single axle loads, for example, it
Introduction and Background 1-13

is possible to extend the findings to 8 X 106 ESAL’s to evaluate and eventually modify and improve the
Use of any design ESAL’s above 8 X 106 requires design procedures and effectiveness of using the
extrapolation beyond the equations developed from Guide
the Road Test results Such extrapolations have, how­
ever, provided reasonable results, based on applica­
tion of the Guide since 1972
The AASHO Road Test, from which the basic de­ 1.4.3 Special Cases
sign equations were derived, was completed after 2
years of traffic testing The prediction models repre­ This Guide is based on performance equations
sented by equations ( 1 2 1) and (1 2 2) do not include from the AASHO Road Test which may not apply
a term for age, i e , an interactive term for age and directly to some urban streets, county roads, park­
traffic For the present state of knowledge there is very ways, or parking lots For city streets, the major traf­
little information available to quantify the effect of fic loads will be generated by service vehicles, buses,
aging on performance as expressed in terms of PSI or and delivery trucks Load equivalency values for such
axle load applications There is a need for more infor­ vehicles are not generally well-estimated by truck load
mation regarding the combined effect of traffic and equivalency factors from truck weighing stations If
aging on performance If a user agency has such infor­ the Guide is used for design of urban streets, an effort
mation it may be possible to modify the performance should be made to obtain information on actual axle
model accordingly However, this Guide makes no loads and frequencies typical of vehicles operating on
direct evaluation of aging effects Evaluation of aging those streets If this is done, the Guide can be used at a
factors along with traffic (ESAL’s) should be a high selected level of reliability
priority for long-term monitoring of pavement per­ For parkways, i e , highways which limit the use of
formance heavy trucks, it may be necessary to adjust the design
Only one set of materials and one roadbed soil were based on a combination of traffic factors, environmen­
included in the AASHO Road Test for each pavement tal factors, and experience Use of load equivalency
type A small experiment also included performance factors as given in Appendix D may result in an under­
observations of stabilized base materials under asphal­ designed pavement and premature deterioration
tic surfaces Use of alternate construction materials
represents an extrapolation of the basic data How­
ever, as previously indicated, such extrapolations are 1.5 ROADBED SOIL
based on investigations using analytical techniques
and are considered reasonable pending results from The definitive material property used to character­
field investigations ize roadbed soil for pavement design in this Guide is
The weather at the Road Test in Ottawa, Illinois, is the resilient modulus (MR) The procedure for deter­
representative of a large portion of the United States, mination of M r is given in AASHTO Test Method
subject to freezing temperatures during the winter and T 274
medium to high rainfall throughout the year An effort The resilient modulus is a measure of the elastic
has been made in Part II of this Guide to provide a property of soil recognizing certain nonlinear charac­
procedure for estimating the effects of seasonal condi­ teristics The resilient modulus can be used directly
tions and modifying these for site specific locations for the design of flexible pavements but must be con­
More information on environment is provided in a verted to a modulus of subgrade reaction (k-value) for
later section of Part I as well as in Part II of the Guide the design of rigid or composite pavements Direct
A number of new concepts have been included in measurement of subgrade reaction can be made if
these Guides, e g , reliability, drainage coefficients, such procedures are considered preferable to the de­
use of resilient modulus to estimate layer coefficients, sign agency
remaining life estimates for overlays, and NDT meth­ The resilient modulus was selected to replace the
ods to estimate in situ resilient modulus These con­ soil support value used in previous editions of the
cepts have limited documentation based on actual field Design Guide for the following reasons
observations; however, they are based on an extensive
evaluation of the present state of the knowledge To the (1) It indicates a basic material property which
extent possible, explanations are provided in the can be used in mechanistic analysis of multi­
Guide in either this volume or Volume 2 It is hoped layered systems for predicting roughness,
that these concepts will find sufficient usage in order cracking, rutting, faulting, etc
1-14 Design o f Pavement Structures

(2) Methods for the determination of MR are de­ For the purposes of this Guide, the following corre­
scribed in AASHTO Test Method T 274 lation may be used for fine-grained soils (R-value less
(3) It has been recognized internationally as a than or equal to 20) until designers develop their own
method for characterizing materials for use in capabilities:
pavement design and evaluation
(4) Techniques are available for estimating the MR
properties of various materials in-place from Mr = 1,000 + 555 X (R-value) (1 5 3)
nondestructive tests

It is recognized that many agencies do not have This discussion summarizes estimates for convert­
equipment for performing the resilient modulus test ing CBR and R-values to a resilient modulus for road­
Therefore, suitable factors are reported which can be bed soil Similar information is provided for granular
used to estimate MR from standard CBR, R-value, and materials in Section 1 6 , Materials of Construction
soil index test results or values The development of Placement of roadbed soil is an important consider­
these factors is based on state of the knowledge corre­ ation in regard to the performance of pavements In
lations It is strongly recommended that user agencies order to improve the general reliability of the design,
acquire the necessary equipment to measure MR In it is necessary to consider compaction requirements
any case, a well-planned experiment design is essen­ For average conditions it is not necessary to specify
tial in order to obtain reliable correlations A range of special provisions for compaction However, there are
soil types, saturation, and densities should be in­ some situations for which the designer should request
cluded in the testing program to identify the main modifications in the specifications
effects Guidelines for converting CBR and R-value to (1) The basic criteria for compaction of roadbed
M r are discussed in this chapter These correlations soils should include an appropriate density
are used in Part II of this Guide pending the establish­ requirement Inspection procedures must be
ment of agency values adequate to assure that the specified density
Heukelom and Klomp (6 ) have reported correla­ is attained during construction If, for any rea­
tions between the Corps of Engineers CBR value, son, the basic compaction requirements cannot
using dynamic compaction, and the in situ modulus of be met, the designer should adjust the design
soil The correlation is given by the following rela­ M r value accordingly
tionship (2) Soils that are excessively expansive or resilient
should receive special consideration One
solution is to cover these soils with a sufficient
MR(psi) = 1,500 X CBR (1 5 1)
depth of selected material to modify the detri­
mental effects of expansion or resilience
The data from which this correlation was developed Expansive soils may often be improved by
ranged from 750 to 3,000 times CBR This relation­ compaction at water contents of 1 or 2 percent
ship has been used extensively by design agencies and above the optimum In some cases it may be
researchers and is considered reasonable for fine­ more economical to treat expansive or resilient
grained soil with a soaked CBR of 10 or less Methods soils by stabilizing with a suitable admixture,
for testing are given in Appendix F The CBR should suc.h as lime or cement, or to encase a substan­
correspond to the expected field density tial thickness in a waterproof membrane
Similar relationships have also been developed by to stabilize the water content Information con­
the Asphalt Institute (7) which relate R-value to MR as cerning expansive soil is covered in Reference
follows 8 Methods for evaluating the potential conse­
quences of expansive roadbed soils are pro­
vided in Appendix G
MR(psi) = A + B X (R-value) (1 5 2) (3) In areas subject to frost, frost-susceptible soils
may be removed and replaced with selected,
nonsusceptible material Where such soils are
where too extensive for economical removal, they
may be covered with a sufficient depth of suit­
A = 772 to 1,155 and able material to modify the detrimental effects
B = 369 to 555 of freezing and thawing Methods for evaluat­
Introduction and Background 1-15

ing the consequences of frost heave are pro­ content Measures used to alleviate such con­
vided in Appendix G and have been reviewed struction problems include (1) blending with
previously in this chapter Methods for com­ granular materials, (2) adding suitable admix­
pensating for seasonal thaw-weakening are tures to sands to provide cohesion, (3) adding
provided in Part II suitable admixtures to clays to hasten drying or
(4) Problems with highly organic soils are related increase shear strength, and (4) covering with
to their extremely compressible nature and are a layer of more suitable selected material to act
accentuated when deposits are nonuniform in as a working platform for construction of the
properties or depth Local deposits, or those of pavement
relatively shallow depth, are often most eco­
nomically excavated and replaced with suitable Resilient Modulus (MR) values for pavement struc­
select material Problems associated with ture design should normally be based on the proper­
deeper and more extensive deposits have been ties of the compact layer of the roadbed soil It may, in
alleviated by placing surcharge embankments some cases, be necessary to include consideration of
for preconsolidation, sometimes with special the uncompacted foundation if these in situ materials
provisions for rapid removal of water to hasten are especially weak It is important to note that the
consolidation design of the pavement structure by this Guide is
(5) Special provisions for unusually variable soil based on the average MR value Although reliability
types and conditions may include scarifying considers the variation of many factors associated
and recompacting, treatment of an upper layer with design, it is treated by adjusting the design traf­
of roadbed soils with a suitable admixture, fic (See Chapter 4 ) The design traffic is the expected
using appreciable depths of more suitable value of 18-kip ESAL’s during the design period The
roadbed soils (select or borrow), over-excava- designer must not select a design MR value based on
tion of cut sections and placing a uniform layer some minimum or conservative criteria as this will
of selected material in both cut-and-fill areas, introduce increased conservatism in design beyond
or adjustment in the thickness of subbase at that provided by the reliability factor
transitions from one soil type to another
(6) Although the design procedure is based on the
assumption that provisions will be made for 1.6 MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION
surface and subsurface drainage, some situa­
tions may require that special attention be Materials used for construction of the pavement
given to design and construction of drainage structure can be divided into two general classes, (1)
systems Drainage is particularly important those for flexible pavements and (2) those for rigid
where heavy flows of water are encountered pavements Materials used for composite pavements
(i e , springs or seeps), where detrimental include those for roadbed preparation, for a subbase,
frost conditions are present, or where soils are and for a portland cement concrete slab with an as­
particularly susceptible to expansion or loss of phalt concrete wearing surface An asphalt concrete
strength with increase in water content Spe­ overlay on a rigid pavement is considered a composite
cial subsurface drainage may include provision pavement
of additional layers of permeable material be­ In order to complete the design requirements for
neath the pavement for interception and collec­ flexible pavements, it may be necessary to convert
tion of water, and pipe drains for collection and CBR or R-value information to resilient modulus, MR
transmission of water Special surface drainage In the absence of agency correlations, the following
may require such facilities as dikes, paved correlations are provided for unbound granular mate­
ditches, and catch-basins rials (base and subbase):
(7) Certain roadbed soils pose difficult problems
in construction These are primarily the cohe-
sionless soils, which are readily displaced un­ 0(psi) MR(psi)
der equipment used to construct the pavement,
100 740 X CBR or 1,000 + 780 X R
and wet clay soils, which cannot be compacted
30 440 X CBR or 1,000 + 450 X R
at high water contents because of displacement
20 340 X CBR or 1,000 + 350 X R
under rolling equipment and which require
10 250 X CBR or 1,000 + 250 X R
long periods of time to dry to a suitable water
1-16 Design o f Pavement Structures

where 0 = sum of the principal stresses, c*! + o 2 + When roadbed soils are of relatively poor quality
o 3; referring to AASHTO T 274, this corresponds to and the design procedure indicates that a substantial
o d + 3o3 when o d = Oi — o 3 thickness of pavement is required, several alternate
The strength of the granular base or subbase is designs should be prepared for structural sections
related to the stress state which will occur under oper­ with and without subbase The selection of an alter­
ating conditions The sum of the principal stresses, 0, nate may then be made on the basis of availability and
is a measure of the stress state, which is a function of relative costs of materials suitable for base and sub­
pavement thickness, load, and the resilient modulus of base Because lower quality materials may be used in
each layer As an agency becomes increasingly famil­ the lower layers of a flexible pavement structure, the
iar with these parameters, it will be possible to deter­ use of a subbase course is often the most economical
mine the stress state from a layered system analysis solution for construction of pavements over poor road­
following procedures given in Part IV of the Guide bed soils
However, if such information is not available, esti­ Although no specific quality requirements for sub­
mates of resilient modulus values provided in Part II of base material are presented in this Guide, the
this Guide may be used AASHTO Construction Manual fo r Highway Con­
struction can be used as a guide Many different mate­
rials have been used successfully for subbase Local
experience can be used as the basis for selection For
1.6.1 Flexible Pavements use in this design procedure, subbase material, if
present, requires the use of a layer coefficient (a3), in
As shown in Figure 1 1, flexible pavements gener­
order to convert its actual thickness to a structural
ally consist of a prepared roadbed underlying layers of
number (SN) Special consideration must be given to
subbase, base, and surface courses In some cases the
determining the minimum thickness of base and sur­
subbase and/or base will be stabilized to maximize the
facing required over a given subbase material Proce­
use of local materials The engineering literature con­
dures that may be used for this purpose are given in
tains a good deal of information relative to soil and
Part II Procedures for assigning appropriate layer co­
aggregate stabilization (9, 10)
efficients based on expected MR are given in Part II
References 9 and 10 provide a state of the knowl­
Untreated aggregate subbase should be compacted
edge description of procedures for selecting the stabi­
to 95 percent of maximum laboratory density, or
lizing agents appropriate to various soil types and
higher, based on AASHTO Test T 180, Method D, or
construction methods Pavement design examples in
the equivalent In addition to the major function as a
Reference 9 refer to the 1972 Interim Guide, however,
structural portion of the pavement, subbase courses
the examples can still be used to illustrate design con­
may have additional secondary functions, such as:
cepts appropriate for use with stabilized materials
(1) Preventing the intrusion of fine-grained road­
bed soils into base courses—relatively dense-
Prepared Roadbed. The prepared roadbed is a
graded materials must be specified if the
layer of compacted roadbed soil or select borrow
subbase is intended to serve this purpose
material which has been compacted to a specified
(2) Minimize the damaging effects of frost
density
action—materials not susceptible to detrimen­
tal frost action must be specified if the subbase
Subbase Course. The subbase course is the por­ is intended for this purpose
tion of the flexible pavement structure between the (3) Preventing the accumulation of free water
roadbed soil and the base course It usually consists of within or below the pavement structure—a
a compacted layer of granular material, either treated relatively free-draining material may be speci­
or untreated, or of a layer of soil treated with a suit­ fied for the subbase if this is the intention
able admixture In addition to its position in the pave­ Provisions must also be made for collecting
ment, it is usually distinguished from the base course and removing the accumulated water from the
material by less stringent specification requirements subbase if this layer is to be included as part of
for strength, plasticity, and gradation The subbase the drainage system If the subbase is to be
material should be of significantly better quality than designed as a drainage layer, it will be neces­
the roadbed soil For reasons of economy, the subbase sary to limit the fraction passing the No 8
is often omitted if roadbed soils are of high quality sieve to a very small percent
Introduction and Background 1-17

(4) Providing a working platform for construction treated materials are in short supply Economic advan­
equipment—important when roadbed soil tages may result not only from the use of low-cost
cannot provide the necessary support aggregates but also from possible reduction in the
total thickness of the pavement structure that may
Base Course. The base course is the portion of result from the use of treated materials Careful study
the pavement structure immediately beneath the sur­ is required in the selection of the type and amount of
face course It is constructed on the subbase course, admixture to be used for optimum performance and
or, if no subbase is used, directly on the roadbed soil economy
Its major function in the pavement is structural sup­ For use in this design procedure, base material
port It usually consists of aggregates such as crushed must be represented by a layer coefficient (a2) in order
stone, crushed slag, crushed gravel and sand, or com­ that its actual thickness may be converted to a struc­
binations of these materials It may be used untreated tural number Procedures for the determination of
or treated with suitable stabilizing admixtures, such as layer coefficients based on MR are given in Part II
Portland cement, asphalt, lime, cement-flyash and
lime-flyash, i e , pozzolonic stabilized bases Specifi­ Drainage Layer. A number of agencies are now
cations for base course materials are generally consid­ considering or constructing pavements with a drainage
erably more stringent than for subbase materials in course, or layer, as shown in Figure 1 3 (11) Figure
requirements for strength, plasticity, and gradation 1 3 illustrates one configuration, alternate designs are
Guidelines for stabilization can be found in Refer­ shown in Appendix AA of Volume 2 and in References
ences 9 and 10 12 and 13
When utilizing pozzolonic stabilized bases under a The cross section shown in Figure 1 3 is illustrative
relatively thin asphaltic wearing surface, it can usually only The location of the longitudinal drain with
be expected that uncontrolled transverse reflection respect to the traveled way can vary depending on
cracks will occur in the surface in a relatively short designer preference and local experience Also, this
period of time, e g , 1 to 3 years Sawed and sealed figure does not show the collector systems and outlet
joints (through the asphalt concrete into the base) may requirements for a total drainage design Reference
be utilized to minimize the adverse effects on appear­ should be made to Appendix AA of Volume 2 and
ance and to provide for better future sealing opera­ References 11, 12, 13, 22, and 23 for additional infor­
tions Joint spacing may vary from 20 to 40 feet mation regarding the design of drainage systems
depending on local experience with past uncontrolled The designer should give some consideration to the
crack-spacing problems preferred construction sequence when specifying a
Although no specific quality requirements for base drainage system, e g , excavation and installation after
courses are presented in this Guide, the specifications the travel lane paving has been completed Local prac­
included in AASHTO’s Manual fo r Highway Con­ tice should be followed; however, the designer should
struction or in ASTM Specification D 2940, “ Graded be aware that special provisions to the specifications
Aggregate Material for Bases or Subbase for High­ may be necessary Additional information concerning
ways and Airports,” are often used Materials varying the design of the drainage layer is provided in Section
in gradation and quality from these specifications have 1 8 of Part I and in Appendix AA of Volume 2
been used in certain areas and have provided satisfac­ Tables 1 1 , 1 2 , and 1 3 provide some background
tory performance Additional requirements for quality information for estimating the permeability of various
of base materials, based on test procedures used by the types of material
constructing agency, may also be included in materials Table 1 1 provides general relationships between
or construction specifications coarse-graded unstabilized materials and their coeffi­
Untreated aggregate base should be compacted to cients of permeability (11)
at least 95 percent of maximum laboratory density Table 1 2 provides guidelines for the gradation of
based on AASHTO Test T 180, Method D, or the asphalt-treated permeable material (11) At least one
equivalent A wide variety of materials unsuitable for state agency has reported the same gradation for
use as untreated base course have given satisfactory porous concrete used as a drainage layer
performance when improved by addition of a stabiliz­ Table 1 3 summarizes information relative to the
ing admixture, such as portland cement, asphalt, or permeability of graded aggregates as a function of the
lime Consideration should be given to the use of such percent passing the No 200 mesh sieve Additional
treated materials for base courses whenever they are information concerning materials to be used for the
economically feasible, particularly when suitable un­ drainage course is provided in Reference 12
1-18 Design o f Pavement Structures

A Base is used as the drainage layer

B Drainage layer is part of or below the subbase.

Base and subbase material

must meet vertical drainage
permeability criteria

A C or PCC

Drainage layer
as part of or
below the subbase Material must meet
filter criteria

Material must meet filter criteria if base or

subbase adjacent to drainage layer does not
meet filter criteria

Note: Filter fabrics may be used in lieu of filter material, soil,

or aggregate, depending on economic considerations

Figure 1.3. Example of Drainage Layer in Pavement Structure (11)

Introduction and Background 1-19

Table 1.1. Permeability of Graded Aggregates (11)

Sample Number
Percent Passing 1 2 3 4 5 6
3/4-inch sieve 100 100 100 100 100 100
V2-inch sieve 85 84 83 81 5 79 5 75
3/8-inch sieve 77 5 76 74 72 5 69 5 63
No 4 sieve 58 5 56 52 5 49 43 5 32
No 8 sieve 42 5 39 34 29 5 22 5 8
No 10 sieve 39 35 30 25 17 0
No 20 sieve 26 5 22 15 5 9 8 0 0
No 40 sieve 18 5 13 3 6 3 0 0 0
No 60 sieve 13 0 7 5 0 0 0 0
No 140 sieve 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
No 200 sieve 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dry density (pcf) 121 117 115 111 104 101
Coefficient of permeability
(ft per day) 10 110 320 1,000 2,600 3,000
N o te : Subsurface drainage systems should be capable of removing

The approximate coefficient of permeability of the Specifications, for both design and construction, of
asphalt-treated permeable material is 3,000 feet or drainage courses are under development, hence, mate­
more per day when treated with 2-percent asphalt and rial requirements should be referenced to the latest
8,000 feet per day with no asphalt guide specifications of AASHTO, ASTM, or the ap­
propriate state agency responsible for developing
statewide criteria and requirements Information in
Tables 1 1 , 1 2 , and 1 3 provides some guidelines for
Table 1.2. Gradation for Asphalt Treated
Permeable Layer (11) estimating permeability
The N J Department of Transportation has devel­
Sieve Size Percent Passing oped specifications for bituminous stabilized and non­
1" 100 stabilized open-graded mixes for drainage layers The
3/4" 90-100 gradation requirements used by the NJDOT are:
3/s" 30-50
No 4 0-5
No 8 0-2 Sieve Size Percent Passing
15 in 100
10 in 95-100
0 5 in 60-80
Table 1.3. Effect of Percentage Passing 200
No 4 40-55
Mesh Sieve on Coefficient of
No 8 5-25
Permeability of Dense Graded
No 16 0-8
Aggregate, Feet Per Day (11)
No 50 0-5
Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve
Types of
Fines 0 5 10 15
This material can be made with a 50/50 blend of
Silica or
No 57 and No 9 stone of a crushed stone The target
limestone 10 0 07 0 08 0 03
permeability suggested by NJDOT is 1,000-3,000 ft
Silt 10 0 08 0 001 0 0002
per day Laboratory testing for permeability is recom­
Clay 10 0 01 0 0005 0 00009
mended prior to approval of the porous layer material
1-20 Design of Pavement Structures

A “ cookbook” approach to the internal drainage water penetrating the pavement, to provide a skid-
problem is given by G S Kozloo in Transportation resistance surface, and to provide a smooth and uni­
Record 993 form riding surface
The measurement of subsurface drainage is gener­ The success of a surface course depends to a degree
ally based on the time required for 50-percent of the on obtaining a mixture with the optimum gradation of
unbound water to be removed from the layer to be aggregate and percent of bituminous binder to be
drained The Casagrande flow equation for estimating durable and to resist fracture and raveling without be­
the 50-percent drainage time is expressed as coming unstable under expected traffic and climatic
conditions The use of a laboratory design procedure
is essential to ensure that a mixture will be satis­
t5o - (he x L2)/[2 x K X (H + L X tan a)] factory
(1 6 1) Although dense-graded aggregates with a maxi­
mum size of about 1 inch are most commonly speci­
fied for surface courses for highways, a wide variety
where of other gradations, from sands to coarse, open-
graded mixtures, have been used and have provided
h>o = time for 50 percent of unbound water satisfactory performance for specific conditions Sur­
to drain (days), face courses are usually prepared by hot plant mixing
he = effective porosity (80 percent of with an asphalt cement, but satisfactory performance
absolute porosity), has also been obtained by cold plant mixing, or even
L = length of flow path (feet), mixing, in-place, with liquid asphalts or asphalt emul­
K = permeability constant (ft /day), and sions Hot plant mixes, e g , asphalt concrete, are
tan a = slope of the base layer recommended foi use on all moderate to heavily traf­
ficked highways
Construction specifications usually require that a
Filter Material. A detailed description of filter bituminous material be applied on untreated aggregate
layers is contained in Appendix AA, Volume 2 base courses as a prime coat, and on treated base
Ridgeway (11) provides the following general com­ courses and between layers of the surface course to
ments: serve as a tack coat
The drainage layer and the collector system No specific quality requirements for surface
must be prevented from clogging if the system courses are presented in this Guide It is recognized
is to remain functioning for a long period of that each agency will prepare specifications that are
time This is accomplished by means of a filter based on performance, local construction practices,
between the drain and the adjacent material and the most economical use of local materials
The filter material, which is made from select ASTM Specification D 3515 provides some guidelines
aggregates or fabrics, must meet three general for designing asphalt concrete paving mixes
requirements (1) it must prevent finer mate­ It is particularly important that surface courses be
rial, usually the subgrade, from piping or mi­ properly compacted during construction Improperly
grating into the drainage layer and clogging it, compacted surface courses are more likely to exhibit a
(2) it must be permeable enough to carry water variety of types of distress that tend to reduce the life
without any resistance, and (3) it must be and overall level of performance of the pavement
strong enough to carry the loads applied and, Types of distress that are often related to insufficient
for aggregate, to distribute live loads to the compaction during construction include rutting result­
subgrade ing from further densification under traffic, structural
failure resulting from excess infiltration of surface
water through the surface course, and cracking or rav­
Surface Course. The surface course of a flexible eling of the surface course resulting from embrittle­
structure consists of a mixture of mineral aggregates ment of the bituminous binder by exposure to air and
and bituminous materials placed as the upper course water in the mixture Specific criteria for compaction
and usually constructed on a base course In addition must be established by each highway agency based on
to its major function as a structural portion of the local experience Theoretical maximum densities of
pavement, it must also be designed to resist the abra­ 92 percent or more are sometimes specified for dense-
sive forces of traffic, to reduce the amount of surface graded mixes
Introduction and Background 1-21

1.6.2 Rigid Pavements contact agency personnel familiar with current re­
quirements
As shown in Figure 1 1, rigid pavements generally
consist of a prepared roadbed underlying a layer of Pavement Slab. The basic materials in the pave­
subbase and a pavement slab The subbase may be ment slab are portland cement concrete, reinforcing
stabilized or unstabilized In cases of low volume road steel, load transfer devices, and joint sealing materi­
design where truck traffic is low, a subbase layer may als Quality control on the project to ensure that the
not be necessary between the prepared roadbed and materials conform to AASHTO or the agency specifi­
the pavement slab cations will minimize distress resulting from distor­
A drainage layer can be included in rigid pavements tion or disintegration
in much the same manner described for flexible pave­
ments as shown in Figure 1 3 Alternate drainage de­
Portland Cement Concrete. The mix design and
signs are shown in Appendix A A, Volume 2
material specifications for the concrete should be in
accordance with, or equivalent to, the requirements of
Subbase. The subbase of a rigid pavement struc­ the AASHTO Guide Specifications fo r Highway
ture consists of one or more compacted layers of Construction and the Standard Specifications fo r
granular or stabilized material placed between the Transportation Materials Under the given conditions
subgrade and the rigid slab for the following pur­ of a specific project, the minimum cement factor
poses should be determined on the basis of laboratory tests
and prior experience of strength and durability
( 1) to provide uniform, stable, and permanent Air-entrained concrete should be used whenever it
support,
is necessary to provide resistance to surface deteriora­
(2) to increase the modulus of subgrade reaction
tion from freezing and thawing or from salt or to
(k), improve the workability of the mix
(3) to minimize the damaging effects of frost
action,
(4) to prevent pumping of fine-grained soils at Reinforcing Steel. The reinforcing steel used in
joints, cracks, and edges of the rigid slab, and the slab should have surface deformations adequate to
(5) to provide a working platform for construction bond and develop the working stresses in the steel For
equipment smooth wire mesh, this bond is developed through the
welded cross wires For deformed wire fabric, the
If the roadbed soils are of a quality equal to that of bond is developed by deformations on the wire and at
a subbase, or in cases where design traffic is less than the welded intersections
1,000,000 18-kip ESAL’s, an additional subbase layer
may not be needed Joint Sealing Materials Three basic types of
A number of different types of subbases have been sealants are presently used for sealing joints
used successfully These include graded granular
materials and materials stabilized with suitable admix­ (1) Liquid sealants These include a wide variety
tures Local experience may also provide useful crite­ of materials including asphalt, hot-poured
ria for the selection of subbase type The prevention of rubber, elastomeric compounds, silicone, and
water accumulations on or in roadbed soils or sub­ polymers The materials are placed in the joint
bases is essential if satisfactory performance of the in a liquid form and allowed to set When using
pavement structure is to be attained It is recom­ liquid sealants, care should be taken to provide
mended that the subbase layer be carried 1 to 3 feet the proper shape factor for the movement
beyond the paved roadway width or to the inslope if expected
required for drainage (2) Preformed elastomeric seals These are ex­
Problems with the erosion of subbase material truded neoprene seals having internal webs
under the pavement slab at joints and at the pavement that exert an outward force against the joint
edge have led some designers to use a lean concrete or face The size and installation width depend on
porous layers for subbase While the use of a porous the amount of movement expected at the joint
layer is encouraged it should be noted that design (3) Cork expansion joint filler There are two
criteria for such materials are still in the development types of cork fillers: (a) standard expansion
stage and the designer should review the literature or joint filler, and (b) self-expanding (SE) type
1-22 Design o f Pavement Structures

Longitudinal Joints Longitudinal joints are lengths, and spacings for different pavement condi­
needed to form cracks at the desired location so that tions are presented in Part II
they may be adequately sealed They may be keyed, Other approved connectors may also be used The
butted, or tied joints, or combinations thereof Longi­ tensile strength of such connectors should be equal to
tudinal joints should be sawed or formed to a mini­ that of the deformed bar that would be required The
mum depth of one-fourth of the slab thickness Timing spacing of these connectors should conform to the
of the sawcutting is critical to the crack formation at same requirements given for deformed tie bars in
the desired location The maximum recommended Part II
longitudinal joint spacing is 16 feet Consideration should be given to the use of corro­
sion-resistant materials or coatings for both tie bars
Load-Transfer Devices Mechanical load-trans- and dowels where salts are to be applied to the surface
fer devices for transverse joints should possess the of the pavement
following attributes

(1) They should be simple in design, be practical 1.6.3 Shoulders

to install, and permit complete encasement by
the concrete Shoulders have often in the past been constructed of
(2) They should properly distribute the load a flexible base with an asphalt surfacing or of a stabi­
stresses without overstressing the concrete at lized base with an asphalt surfacing The combination
its contact with the device of a dissimilarity between the outside lane and shoul­
(3) They should offer little restraint to longitudinal der and the encroachment of heavy wheel loads onto
movement of the joint at any time the shoulder have sometimes resulted in joint prob­
(4) They should be mechanically stable under the lems between the travel lanes and the shoulder
wheel load weights and frequencies that will Research has shown that strengthening of the shoulder
prevail in practice and adding special sealants have helped to alleviate
(5) They should be resistant to corrosion when this problem The use of tied concrete shoulders or
used in those geographic locations where cor­ 3-foot monolithic widening of the outside PCC lane
rosive elements are a problem (Various types has also proven beneficial (1 5-foot monolithic widen­
of coatings are often used to minimize corro­ ing is acceptable if a rumble strip is provided as a
sion ) deterrent to edge encroachment) Thickening the out­
side edge of the travel lane or using a monolithic curb
A commonly used load-transfer device is the plain, (where appropriate) also strengthens the pavement
round steel dowel conforming to AASHTO Designa­ edge and reduces the shoulder-joint problem Provi­
tion M 31-Grade 60 or higher Specific design re­ sion for slab design which incorporates tied shoulders
quirements for these relative to diameter, length, and and widened outside lanes is provided in Part II of this
spacing are provided in Part II Although round Guide
dowels are the most commonly used, other mechani­ Additional information pertinent to shoulder design
cal devices that have proven satisfactory in field instal­ is given in Section 1 9
lations may also be used
Consideration may also be given to omitting load
transfer devices from transverse weakened plane 1.7 ENVIRONMENT
joints in plain jointed concrete pavement when sup­
ported on a treated permeable base Two main environmental factors are considered
with regard to pavement performance and pavement
Tie Bars. Tie bars, either deformed steel bars or structure design in this Guide, specifically, these are
connectors, are designed to hold the faces of abutting temperature and rainfall
slabs in firm contact Tie bars are designed to with­ Temperature will affect (1) the creep properties of
stand the maximum tensile forces required to over­ asphalt concrete, (2) thermal-induced stresses in as­
come subgrade drag They are not designed to act as phalt concrete, (3) contraction and expansion of Port­
load-transfer devices land cement concrete, and (4) freezing and thawing of
Deformed bars should be fabricated from billet or the roadbed soil Temperature and moisture differen­
axle steel of Grade 40 conforming to AASHTO M 31 tial between the top and bottom of concrete slabs in
or M 53 Specific recommendations on bar sizes, jointed concrete pavements creates an upward curling
Introduction and Background 1-23

and warping of the slab ends which can result in portional to the rate of penetration of freezing
pumping and structural deterioration of undrained temperature into the soil
sections (3) Water A source of water must be available
Rainfall, if allowed to penetrate the pavement struc­ from the underlying groundwater table, infil­
ture or roadbed soil, will influence the properties of tration or gravitational flow, an aquifier, or the
those materials This section of the Guide covers water held within the voids of fine-grained
problems associated with temperature Section 1 8 soil
covers drainage requirements as related to rainfall
Periods of thawing are among the most critical
Freezing and thawing of roadbed soil has tradition­
phases in the annual cycle of environmental changes
ally been a major concern of pavement designers The
affecting pavements in seasonal frost areas Such
major effect is with regard to the thaw-weakening
thawing cycles are in many cases very disruptive, de­
which can occur during the spring thaw period Figure
pending on the rapidity of the thaw and the drainage
1 4 illustrates the seasonal effects which can occur in
capabilities of the pavement system During thaw per­
many regions of the United States A second effect of
freezing is the occurrence of frost heaving, causing a iods considerable melting of snow may occur, with
melt water filling the ditches and infiltrating into the
reduction in the serviceability of the pavement
Procedures for calculating the damage during vari­ pavement from the shoulders and through surface
ous seasons of the year as a function of thaw-weaken­ cracks in the pavement itself During thawing periods,
ing and frost heaving are given in Part II It is beyond the bearing capacity of the roadbed soil may be se­
the scope of the Guide to describe in detail the mecha­ verely reduced, and frost heaving frequently is more
nism related to frost susceptibility, thaw-weakening, severe after midwinter thaw periods In areas of deep
and frost heaving The user is referred to Reference 14 frost penetration, the period of complete thawing of
for more information on this subject A few of the thicker pavement structures in the spring is usually the
more pertinent considerations from Reference 14 most damaging type of thaw period because it affects
which relate to pavement structure design in frost the roadbed as well as subbase and base layers The
areas are reproduced in this section of the Guide severity of the adverse effect on the supporting capac­
Frost heaving of soil within or beneath a pavement ity of a given roadbed is laigely dependent on the
is caused by the accumulation of ice within the larger temperature distribution in the ground during the
soil voids and, usually, a subsequent expansion to thawing period
form continuous ice lenses, layers, veins, or other ice Thawing can proceed from the top downward, from
masses The growth of such distinct bodies of ice is the bottom upward, or both The manner of thawing
termed ice segregation A lens grows in thickness in depends on the pavement surface temperature During
the direction of heat transfer until the water supply is a sudden spring thaw, melting will proceed almost
depleted, as by formation of a new lens at a lower entirely from the surface downward This type of
level, or until freezing conditions at the freezing inter­ thawing leads to extremely adverse drainage condi­
face will no longer support further crystallization tions The still-frozen soil beneath the thawed layer
Investigations (12, 13, 16) have shown that ice segre­ traps the water released by the melting ice lenses so
gation occurs only in soils containing fine particles that lateral and surface drainage are the only means of
Such soils are said to be frost susceptible; clean sands egress In granular soils, lateral drainage may be re­
and gravels are nonfrost-susceptible soils The degree stricted by still-frozen shoulders resulting from the
of frost susceptibility is principally a function of the insulating effect of snow and/or different thermal con­
percentage of fine particles and, to a lesser degree, of ductivity and surface reflectivity characteristics If air
particle shape, distribution of grain sizes, and mineral temperatures in the spring remain cool and frosty at
composition night, upward conduction of heat stored in the ground
The following three conditions of soil, tempera­ from the previous summer and of heat from the inte­
ture, and water must be present simultaneously in rior of the earth will produce thawing, principally
order for ice segregation to occur in the subsurface from the bottom upward Such thawing permits soil
materials: moisture from melted ice lenses to drain downward
while the material above it remains frozen
(1) Soil The soil must be frost susceptible The climatic factors of air temperature, solar radia­
(2) Temperature Freezing temperatures must pen­ tion received at the surface, wind, and precipitation
etrate the soil In general, the thickness of a are major parameters that effect the severity of frost
particular layer or lens of ice is inversely pro­ effects in a given geographical area The first three
1-24 Design o f Pavement Structures
Introduction and Background 1-25

mainly affect the temperature regime in the pavement concrete Variations due to pavement type, soil type,
structure, including the important parameters of depth duration of low temperature, and water content may
of frost penetration, number of freeze-thaw cycles, affect the actual frost penetration, however, it is clear
and duration of the freezing and thawing periods Pre­ that frost penetration can extend well into the roadbed
cipitation affects mainly the moisture regime but soils during sustained periods of freezing tempera­
causes changes in the thermal properties of the soil tures
and interacts with the other climatic variables deter­ Most studies have shown that a soil is frost suscep­
mining ground temperatures as well tible only if it contains fine particles Soils free of
Investigators who have endeavored to calculate the material passing the 200 mesh sieve generally do not
depth of frost penetration have found it convenient to develop significant ice segregation or frost heave
make use of a freezing index (15), which expresses A reliable method for recognizing a frost suscept­
the cumulative effect of intensity and duration of sub­ ible material for site specific conditions has not, as
freezing air temperatures The freezing index is ex­ yet, been identified Some guidelines are available in
pressed in degree days and represents the difference the literature and are described by Johnson, et al
between the highest and lowest points on a curve of (14) The U S Corps of Engineers have reported that
cumulative degree days versus time for one freezing most inorganic soils containing 3 percent (by weight)
season The degree days for any one day equals the or more of grains finer than 0 02 mm in diameter are
difference between the average daily air temperature considered frost susceptible for pavement design pur­
and 32 °F Degree days are plus when the average daily poses (16)
temperature is below 32 °F (freezing degree days) and In summary, frost action due to freezing tempera­
minus when above 32°F (thawing degree days) Thus, tures in soil, can cause both heaving and thaw-weak­
an average daily temperature of 31°F is equal to one ening However, thaw-weakening is not necessarily
degree day, 33°F is equal to minus one degree day, directly proportional to heaving since field experience
and 22 °F is equal to 10 degree days shows that thaw-weakened but well-drained sandy or
The freezing index for a given year and site loca­ gravelly materials recover bearing strength quite rap­
tion can be calculated from average daily air tempera­ idly, whereas clayey soils may show little heave but
ture records, which should be obtained from a station recover their stability very slowly (14) The design
situated close to the construction site This is neces­ procedure in Part II of this Guide provides for both
sary because differences in elevation and topography, frost heave and thaw-weakening
and nearness to centers of population or bodies of The period of thaw-weakening can be estimated
water (rivers, lakes, seacoast) and other sources of from deflection measurements, as shown in Figure
heat, are likely to cause considerable variations in the 1 5 These data were obtained at the AASHO Road
value of the freezing index over short distances Such Test and indicate that the thaw-weakening period can
variations may be of sufficient magnitude to affect a range from a few weeks to a few months, with varying
pavement design based on depth of frost penetration, degrees of reduction in structural capacity Further
particularly in areas where the freezing index used in guidelines relative to thaw-weakening periods are
the calculation is more than about 100 degree days given in Part II of this Guide, however, user agencies
Table 1 4 provides an indication of the depth of frost are encouraged to develop these relationships based
based on the penetration of the 32°F (0°C) isotherm on site specific measurements within their areas and
below the surface of 12 inches of portland cement to compare such experience with other agencies na­
tionally
Laboratory tests and field evaluations indicate that
the retained modulus during the thaw-weakening per­
Table 1.4. Frost Penetration under Portland
iod may be 20 to 50 percent of the normal modulus
Cement Concrete Pavement (11)
obtained during the summer and fall periods
Air-Freezing Index Frost Penetration It should be noted that the resilient modulus for
(degree days) (feet) roadbed soils may also vary by season even when no
thaw-weakening period is experienced For example,
200 18
during the heavy rainy periods it might be expected
400 30
that some seasonal variation in bearing capacity will
600 4 0
occur There may be other situations in which no sea­
800 50
sonal variations occur and a constant modulus can be
1,000 60
used for the roadbed soil Note that the modulus is
 1-26 Design o f Pavement Structures
Creep Speed Deflection, inches
Creep Speed Deflection, inches

Figure 1.5. Seasonal Deflection on Nontraffic Loop, 6-kip Single Axle Load (17)
Introduction and Background 1-27

related to CBR, R-value, or plate bearing value and, fic The recommendations from this study indicate
hence, experience with these types of strength tests that the softer grades of asphalt, i e , AC-5 or equiva­
can be used to infer the seasonal effects on the lent, should be used in cold climates (when the mean
modulus annual air temperature is less than 4 5 °F); and harder
While information is generally lacking with regard grades, i e , AC-20 or equivalent, in hot climates
to the effects of thaw-weakening or water saturation on (when the mean annual air temperature is greater than
untreated aggregate base and subbase, some research 75°F) The specific selection of asphalt grade will be
does suggest that a reduced modulus can occur during a function of local experience, however, it is recom­
certain critical seasons Reference 18, based on mended that consideration be given to the above
results of spring deflection measurements at the guidelines
AASHO Road Test, indicates that the retained modu­ For thick, full-depth asphalt concrete, there are in­
lus ranged from 80 to 85 percent of the normal dications from research that fatigue cracking can be
modulus obtained during the summer and fall If these significantly affected by temperature (27) In general,
layers had been well drained no reduction in modulus these findings suggest that the harder grades of asphalt
would be anticipated will provide improved performance in terms of fatigue
In order to compensate for thaw-weakening effects cracking Thus, an AC-40 would be appropriate in
on pavement performance, provision has been made in warm climates for thick (7 inches or more) pavements
Part II to calculate an effective annual roadbed soil It should be noted that the selection of the grade of
resilient modulus The effective modulus used for a asphalt, per se, will not solve all of the problems of
full 12 months will produce the same change in PSI as premature cracking The designer must also give care­
would be obtained by calculating the change with the ful attention to all of the factors which can influence
respective seasonal moduli performance, e g , structural design, drainage, con­
The design for frost areas included in this Guide struction, thaw-weakening, etc
depend to a large extent on the performance of rigid
and flexible pavements at the AASHO Road Test It is
recognized that experience in some northern tier states 1.8 DRAINAGE
and Alaska may indicate that alternate procedures can
be used For example, some state agencies require a Drainage of water from pavements has always been
12- to 24-inch granular layer over frost susceptible an important consideration in road design, however,
roadbed soils Other agencies require full or partial current methods of design have often resulted in base
replacement of frost susceptible materials (16) Such courses that do not drain well This excess water com­
requirements could increase the total thickness of the bined with increased traffic volumes and loads often
pavement structure when compared with requirements leads to early pavement distress in the pavement
of this Guide Careful review of the cost and benefit structure
(performance) of such design policies should be con­ Water enters the pavement structure in many ways,
sidered; however, if field data indicate that life-cycle such as through cracks, joints, or pavement infiltra­
costs can be reduced by following such a procedure tion, or as groundwater from an interrupted aquifier,
there should be no problem in justifying this type of high water table, or localized spring Effects of this
design and construction water (when trapped within the pavement structure)
In addition to the seasonal effect on the subgrade on pavements include:
and granular materials, temperature will also influ­
ence the characteristics of the asphalt concrete (1) reduced strength of unbounded granular
Performance will be affected in three ways: (1) low materials,
temperature cracking, (2) fatigue cracking, and (3) (2) reduced strength of roadbed soils,
rutting It is not clear from research studies just how (3) pumping of concrete pavements with subse­
much these factors will influence PSI (79) However, quent faulting, cracking, and general shoulder
low temperature cracking and fatigue cracking will deterioration, and
increase maintenance costs, and rutting is a safety (4) pumping of fines in aggregate base under flexi­
consideration related to potential hydroplaning as well ble pavements with resulting loss of support
as a maintenance problem
Less frequently noticed problems due to entrapped
Reference 20 summarizes information concerning
water include (but are not limited to)
premature cracking in asphalt concrete due to low
temperature induced stresses and fatigue due to traf­ (1) stripping of asphaltic concrete,
1-28 Design o f Pavement Structures

(2) differential heaving over swelling soils, and from the pavement and provide for rapid drainage
(3) frost heave While both approaches are extremely difficult, this
Guide will emphasize only the latter treatment How­
Prior editions of the AASHTO Guide fo r Design o f
ever, maintenance policies should recognize the bene­
Pavement Structures have not treated the effects of
fits and necessity of maintaining the joint sealant and
drainage on pavement performance In this Guide,
thus preventing water from leaking into the subbase
drainage effects are directly considered in terms of the
layer
effect of moisture on roadbed soil and base strength
(for flexible pavements) and the effect of moisture on
subgrade strength and on base erodability (for con­
1.8.2 Design of Pavement Subsurface Drainage
crete pavements) Though consideration for stripping
of asphalt concrete is not directly considered, the ef­
Two general types of pavement subsurface design
fects of swelling soils and frost heave are
criteria have been proposed for use in pavements (11)
These include:

1.8.1 General Design Considerations (1) criterion for the time of drainage of the base or
subbase beginning with the flooded condition
Methods for treating water in pavements have gen­ and continuing to an established acceptable
erally consisted of level, and
(2) an inflow-outflow criterion, by which drainage
(1) preventing water from entering the pavement, occurs at a rate greater than or equal to the
(2) providing drainage to remove excess water inflow rate, thus avoiding saturation
quickly, and
(3) building the pavement strong enough to resist Removal of the free water can be accomplished by
the combined effect of load and water draining the free water vertically into the subgrade, or
laterally through a drainage layer into a system of pipe
When all possible sources of water are considered, collectors Generally, the actual process will be a
protection of the pavement structural section from combination of the two
water entry requires interception of groundwater as
well as sealing of the pavement surface Considerable
attention has generally been given to intercepting 1.8.3 Incorporation of Drainage Into Guide
groundwater, whereas less attention has been given to
sealing the surface to exclude infiltration from rain Drainage effects on pavement performance have
and snow melt As a result, a considerable amount of been considered in this Guide Drainage is treated by
water often enters the pavement substructure, result­ considering the effect of water on the properties of the
ing in a need for some type of drainage pavement layers and the consequences to the structural
To obtain adequate pavement drainage, the de­ capacity of the pavement Additional work is needed
signer should consider providing three types of drain­ to document the actual effect of drainage on pavement
age systems (1) surface drainage, (2) groundwater life
drainage, and (3) structural drainage Such systems, For new design (Part II), the effect of drainage is
however, are only effective for “ free water” Water considered by modifying the structural layer coeffi­
held by capillary forces in soils and in fine aggregates cient (for flexible pavements) and the load transfer
cannot be drained The effects of this “bound” mois­ coefficient (for rigid pavements) as a function of
ture must be considered in the design of pavement
structures through its effect on the pavement material (1) the quality of drainage (e g , the time required
properties Most existing pavements do not include for the pavement to drain), and
drainage systems capable of quickly removing free (2) the percent of time the pavement structure is
water exposed to moisture levels approaching satur­
Most existing design methods have relied on the ation
practice of building pavements strong enough to resist
For rehabilitation of existing pavements, additional
the combined effects of load and water However, they
questions need to be asked These include (22):
do not always account for the potential destructive
effects of water within the pavement structure As a (1) Is the original drainage design adequate for the
result, increased emphasis is needed to exclude water existing road?
Introduction and Background 1-29

(2) What changes are necessary to ensure that A number of agencies have developed specific de­
drainage inadequacies, which may contribute sign criteria for shoulders Where such criteria are
to structural distress, are corrected? available within specific governmental jurisdictions it
(3) If the original drainage system design was is recommended that such criteria be followed pend­
adequate, have environmental or structural ing the development of more specific recommenda­
changes taken place since it was built that re­ tions by AASHTO
quire reconstruction of the system? If design criteria for shoulders are based on pave­
(4) Does the present or projected land use in areas ment structure requirements similar to those used for
adjacent to the road indicate that surface drain­ the traveled way, the design and rehabilitation proce­
age flow patterns have changed or are likely to dures included in Parts II and III of this Guide are
change, thus rendering existing drainage facili­ considered applicable
ties inadequate? The use of tied shoulders or a widened width of
paving in the lane adjacent to the shoulder has proven
Details of the design of subsurface drainage sys­ to be beneficial to overall performance of rigid pave­
tems are important and, therefore, Appendix AA of ments Provision has been made in both Parts II and
Volume 2 has been provided to assist the engineer in III to recognize the benefits to be derived from this
this effort type of design
It is recognized that paved shoulders adjacent to
flexible pavements will provide lateral support for the
1.9 SHOULDER DESIGN base and surface courses No provision is made in this
Guide to modify the design of flexible pavements as a
As defined by AASHTO, a highway shoulder is the function of shoulder design Local practice, experi­
“portion of roadways contiguous with the traveled ence, and cost analysis should, in all cases, be consid­
way for accommodation of stopped vehicles for emer­ ered as prime factors in shoulder design The benefits
gency use, and for lateral support of base and subbase of a paved shoulder will be enhanced if the traffic is
courses ” The shoulder is also considered by some concentrated in the traffic lanes The use of a contrast­
agencies as a temporary detour to be used during reha­ ing shoulder color or texture (seal coats) will help
bilitation of the usual traveled way achieve this objective Truck encroachment onto the
No specific design criteria are provided in this shoulder is a major cause of shoulder distress, hence,
Guide for the determination of the pavement structure any treatment which will minimize operations on the
for shoulders An AASHTO position paper on shoul­ shoulder will benefit the performance of pavements in
der design is included herein as Appendix E the traveled way and on the shoulder
 CHAPTER 2
DESIGN-RELATED PROJECT LEVEL
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT

Pavement management in its broadest sense encom­ management methodologies provides opportunities
passes all the activities involved in the planning, for development of more comprehensive pavement
design, construction, maintenance, evaluation, and management systems, where more activities can be
rehabilitation of the pavement portion of a public included and explicitly interfaced with each other at
works program A pavement management system the network level
(PMS) is a set of tools or methods that assist decision­ Pavement management systems can provide several
makers in finding optimum strategies for providing, benefits for highway agencies at both the network and
evaluating, and maintaining pavements in a service­ project levels Foremost among these is the selection
able condition over a given period of time The of cost-effective alternatives Whether new construc­
function of a PMS is to improve the efficiency of deci­ tion, rehabilitation, or maintenance is concerned,
sion-making, expand its scope, provide feedback on PMS can help management achieve the best possible
the consequences of decisions, facilitate the coordina­ value for the public dollar
tion of activities within the agency, and ensure the At the network level, the management system pro­
consistency of decisions made at different manage­ vides information pertinent to the development of a
ment levels within the same organization statewide or agencywide program of new construc­
In this sense, pavement “ design,” as covered by tion, maintenance, or rehabilitation that will optimize
this design Guide, and “ rehabilitation,” as covered in the use of available resources This relationship is
Part III of the Guide, are vital parts of the overall illustrated on the left side of Figure 2 1
pavement management process The purpose of this Considering the needs of the network as a whole, a
chapter is to show more clearly the interrelations of total PMS provides a comparison of the benefits and
design and rehabilitation with pavement management costs for several alternative programs, making it pos­
and with existing or potential pavement management sible to identify that budget or program which will
systems have the least total cost, or greatest benefit, over the
The detailed structure of a PMS depends on the selected analysis period The benefits of using such a
organization of the particular agency within which it system have been proven in practice
is implemented Nevertheless, an overall, generally At the project level, detailed consideration is given
applicable framework can be defined or established to alternative design, construction, maintenance, or
without regard to any particular detailed departmental rehabilitation activities for a particular roadway sec­
organization Other reports outline rather complete, tion or project within the overall program Here again,
long-term concepts of pavement management, and by comparing the benefits and costs associated with
provide guidelines for immediate application based on several alternative activities, an optimum strategy is
existing technology (29), and thus it is not our pur­ identified that will provide the desired benefits or
pose here to include such guidelines service levels at the least total cost over the analysis
It is convenient to describe pavement management period
in terms of two generalized levels (1) the network
management level, sometimes called the program
level, where key administrative decisions that affect 2.1 RELATIONSHIP OF DESIGN TO
programs for road networks are made, and (2) the PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT
project management level, where technical manage­
ment decisions are made for specific projects Early From Figure 2 1 we see that “ design” is primarily
formal pavement management systems development a project level activity since design is normally not
occurred at the project level More recently, extensive done until budgets are allotted and programs are set
development in maintenance management and data Figure 2 2 illustrates the better known relationships

1-31
1-32 Design o f Pavement Structures

Network Level Project Level

Design
Programming

Construction

Planning
Maintenance

Budgeting
Rehabilitation

Research and Special Studies

such as

Effects of increased truck weights,

new material types, etc

Figure 2.1. Activities of a Pavement Management System (29)

Design-Related Project Level Pavement Management 1-33

Figure 2.2. Major Classes of Activities in a Pavement Management System

1-34 Design o f Pavement Structures

between design and other typical project level activi­ meet, with sufficient reliability, the performance per­
ties once a project or roadway section is selected for iod or required design period constraints set forth If a
construction, and design activities begin given design trial satisfies these constraints, then it
Too often in the past, design alternatives have con­ moves on to the economic evaluation block of the pro­
sidered only those structural sections or design strate­ cess That means that the particular combination of
gies which are expected to last the entire predicted inputs used for that trial, including the thicknesses and
service life or selected performance period It is vital materials used, satisfy the constraints imposed and
to note that pavement management provides an orga­ provide a serviceability history which survives for the
nized approach to correcting these deficiencies It is entire performance period or design life, as illustrated
apparent in Figure 2 3 that the life-cycle economics in Figure 2 5 for Trial B
and the interaction of initial construction and subse­ Trial A on the other hand is not acceptable as a
quent overlay were often not included in past design “ total” design since it does not reach the designated
analyses design life Td Trial A, however, is not dead yet;
More explicitly, a pavement management system although unacceptable as a total design, it may be
(PMS) provides an organized coordinated way of han­ economically acceptable if combined with an ade­
dling the pavement management process The amount quate overlay applied at or before time TA The deci­
of data involved and the number of calculations re­ sion will involve life-cycle costs, including user costs
quired to check the available alternatives clearly indi­ and benefits
cate the need to have some type of device to assist the Many possibilities arise from adding overlays; two
engineer Normally a computer, either micro or main­ of these are illustrated by Trials A1 and A2 in Figure
frame, fills this need very well 2 5 Thus, Trial A1 is rejected because it still does not
Currently then the design function as defined meet life and traffic constraints The design developed
covers new design (Part II of the Guide) as well as in Trial A2 on the other hand is acceptable structurally
rehabilitation (Part III of the Guide) Pavement man­ and now passes on to the economic evaluation subsys­
agement also provides a straightforward mechanism tem for comparison with the total economics of other
for comparing the advantages of various pavement acceptable trial designs Figure 2 6 illustrates the
types and selecting the best pavement type for a given more complete design concept, which allows Trials
situation or set of circumstances It is also essential, A-At and A-A2 to be tested as overall economic de­
of course, that construction provide the as-built pave­ signs The results will depend on the economic analy­
ment as designed This is noted in Section 4 1 2 sis The details of the economic evaluation or
It should be reiterated here that a PMS does not life-cycle costing are presented in Chapter 3
make decisions but provides a method for processing
data and making comparisons which then permit the
designer or decision-maker to sort out the results and 2.2 THE GUIDE AS STRUCTURAL
compare alternate possibilities based on practical real­ SUBSYSTEM FOR A STATE PROJECT
istic decision criteria LEVEL PMS
How then does the design process as outlined in
Parts II and III of this Guide relate to project level The contents of this Guide can be used very effec­
pavement management? Simply put, the solution from tively as the structural model or subsystem for a state
the Guide methodology for a single fixed set of inputs project level PMS It will work most effectively, of
is only one alternative way of fulfilling the require­ course, when the models (equations and nomographs)
ment of the design Figure 2 4 illustrates this aspect of are properly set up for rapid comparative solutions of
the broader pavement concern subsequent trials, such as on a computer or calculator
Given the inputs, which can, of course, be the same The process can begin for new construction or for
as the inputs to be used in the Guide, the Guide equa­ reconstruction as rehabilitation as long as the proper
tions or nomographs become one of the “ models of relationships and input value requirements are com­
pavement structure” shown near the top of Figure 2 4 bined into the process Any state with an existing pro­
There are several models involved, of course, illus­ ject level pavement management system would be well
trated by the fact that there are different models for advised to examine the modification of its PMS to
flexible pavements and rigid pavements Using one of make use of the new guides States using a network
these models will produce an estimate of the design level PMS but no formal project level system, should
life related to a particular set of inputs tested on a first consider early development of a PMS addition which
or second trial for example This may or may not uses the Guide models combined with life-cycle cost
 I
Design-Related Project Level Pavement Management
1-35

Figure 2.3. Schematic Diagram of Typical Past Pavement Design Practice

1-36 Design of Pavement Structures

Figure 2.4. Flow Diagram of a Pavement Management System

Design-Related. Project Level Pavement Management 1-37
1-38 Design o f Pavement Structures

Figure 2.6. Design Process with Possibility of Overlays to Complete Design Life
Design-Related Project Level Pavement Management 1-39

calculations and optimization routines to provide project phases of the PMS process Thus, if the cost
an ordered set of economical designs from which estimates used for each pavement section in the net­
a “ final” design can be selected and implemented work reflects a proper estimate of pavement strength
AASHTO has prepared a written guideline on pave­ made using the Guide models, the resulting funding
ment management which is presented in Appendix allocation to each respective project will more directly
BB, Volume 2 meet the actual needs of the final project level de­
signs, also made using the Guide and its models
Pavement type selection guidelines are reproduced
2.3 PAVEMENT TYPE SELECTION in Appendix B Currently, the most realistic pavement
type selection process can result by obtaining 5 to 10
The process of selecting the proper pavement type most nearly optimal cost solutions for each pavement
is complex and hard to define In the final analysis the type being considered and examining these options
selection process is an economic decision, although qualitatively in the light of the factors outlined in the
all engineering factors must be properly and carefully selection guidelines
considered in such an analysis If all engineering fac­
tors could be properly modeled and all costs properly
compared and discounted to present value the ultimate 2.4 NETWORK LEVEL PAVEMENT
lowest cost pavement of whatever type or design MANAGEMENT
would be the proper pavement type to construct Or,
depending on economy and the models chosen, the Pavement management is an important process at
pavement type yielding the highest benefit/cost ratio the network level, but this Guide is not concerned
would be the proper choice Unfortunately, the models with pavement management at this level The relation­
used to compare pavement types are often not as good ship is much less direct than for project level PMS
as they should be Lack of long-term pavement obser­ However, any network level PMS must have some esti­
vations has limited our ability to model the perform­ mate of pavement condition and related pavement per­
ance of various pavement types on a common basis, formance and cost predictions as a function of time
particularly with respect to long-term environmental and expected traffic A simplified version of the
effects, and the effect and relative costs of mainte­ models and equations presented in this Guide could be
nance used for this purpose The benefits of such a process
In the face of these imperfections in models, errors would include improved interaction and cost esti­
can result and be transmitted between the network and mates, as outlined above
 CHAPTER 3
ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE
PAVEMENT DESIGN STRATEGIES

3.1 INTRODUCTION These include, of course, construction costs, mainte­

nance costs, rehabilitation costs, etc In order to
The application of principles of engineering econ­ compare the costs and value of two automobiles for
omy to pavement projects occurs generally at two purchase we all realize the need to include (1) pur­
levels First, there are the management decisions re­ chase price, (2) gasoline and operating costs, such as
quired to determine the feasibility and programming buying tires, (3) repairs (maintenance), (4) trade-in
of a project; second, there is the requirement to value (salvage), etc The same kind of comparison
achieve the maximum economy within that project if should be recognized for pavements
the project is economically feasible as a whole The Also required, of course, is a consideration of the
second level might be considered suboptimization useful life of the car An inexpensive car may last
with respect to the first level, but it is more important 4 years while an expensive one, carefully selected,
to the designer may last 15 years Since all of these costs do not occur
Project feasibility is determined at the network at the same time, it is useful to determine the amount
level, by comparison with other potential projects, of money which could be invested at a fixed time
whereas within-project economy is achieved by con­ (usually the beginning) and would earn enough money
sidering a variety of alternatives capable of satisfying at a specific interest rate to permit payment of all costs
the overall project requirements when they occur Thus, an interest rate or time value
The major difference in economic evaluation be­ of money becomes important in the calculations
tween these two levels of pavement management con­ “ Life-cycle costs” then is a term coined to call
cerns the amount of detail and information required special attention to the fact that a complete and current
Otherwise, the basic principles involved are the same economic analysis is needed if alternatives are to be
This chapter considers both these principles and their truly and correctly compared to each other
incorporation into methods of economic evaluation
Such models then become a vital part of the pavement
design process
3.3 BASIC CONCEPTS

A great deal has been written on the basic princi­

3.2 LIFE CYCLE COSTS ples of engineering economy and methods of eco­
nomic evaluation Those principles that are applicable
It is essential in economic evaluation that all costs to pavement design can be summarized as follows
occurring during the life of the facility be included
When making economic comparisons this has not al­ (1) The level of management at which the evalua­
ways been carefully practiced or even understood by tion is to be performed should be clearly
pavement designers because comparisons were often identified, this can range from the planning or
made over a fixed, equal design period Thus, design­ programming (network) level (i e , project-to-
ers assumed that first-cost comparisons were adequate project comparison) to a sublevel of design
for economic studies This is not true, and, in order to where one element, such as surface type, is
emphasize the need for a complete cost analysis, the being considered within a project
term “ life-cycle costs” was coined about 1970 for use (2) Economic analysis provides the basis for deci­
with pavements sion but does not provide a decision Criteria
Life-cycle costs refer to all costs (and, in the com­ for such decisions must be separately formu­
plete sense, all benefits) which are involved in the lated before the results of the economic evalua­
provision of a pavement during its complete life cycle tion can be applied Moreover, the economic

1-41
1-42 Design o f Pavement Structures

evaluation itself has no relationship to the sion, right-of-way acquisition, construction, traffic
method or source of financing a project control devices (e g , signals and signs), and land­
(3) An economic evaluation should consider many scaping
possible alternatives within the constraints of
time and design resources This includes the Highway Maintenance Cost. The cost of keeping
need for comparing alternatives, not only with a highway and its appurtenances in serviceable condi­
an existing situation, but with each other tion Changes in administrative costs that can be allo­
(4) Alternatives should be compared over the cated to a particular improvement should also be
same time period This time period should be included
chosen so that the factors involved in the
comparison can be defined with reasonable Highway User Costs. The sum of (1) motor
accuracy vehicle running cost, (2) the value of vehicle user
(5) The economic evaluation of pavements should travel time, and (3) traffic accident cost
include agency costs and user costs and bene­
fits if possible Motor Vehicle R unning Cost. The mileage-de­
pendent cost of running automobiles, trucks, and
Principle 5 is not normally stated for transport pro­
other motor vehicles on the highway, including the
jects because it is an accepted requirement However,
expense of fuel, tires, engine oil, maintenance, and
in the pavement field, the usual practice has been to
that portion of vehicle depreciation attributable to
consider only capital and maintenance costs, with the
highway mileage traveled Operating arid ownership
implied assumption that user costs do not vary This
costs that do not vary with mileage are excluded from
approach is inadequate because, as demonstrated by
running cost, e g , license and parking fees, insurance
McFarland (30) and by Kher, et al (31), user costs
premiums, the time-dependent portion of deprecia­
can vary significantly with these factors Benefits can
tion, and any other costs of off-highway use
then be considered as cost reductions (32)
Value o f Travel Time. The result of vehicle travel
time multiplied by the average unit value of time
3.4 DEFINITIONS RELATED TO
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Vehicle Travel Time. The total vehicle-hours of
time traveled by a specific type of vehicle
The definitions that follow include the principal
technical terms used in text of the AASHTO economic Unit Value o f Time The value attributed to
analysis manual (37) The listing is broken down into 1 hour of travel time, usually different for passenger
two categories economic analysis concepts or con­ cars and trucks
stants, and highway traffic characteristics The defini­
tions have been simplified in some cases for use with Traffic Accident Costs. The cost attributable to
pavement projects motor vehicle traffic accidents, usually estimated by
multiplying estimated accident rates by the average
cost per accident
3.4.1 Transportation Improvement Costs
User Costs. The sum of highway user costs
This refers to the sum of highway investment cost,
highway maintenance cost, and highway user cost as­
sociated with a given highway improvement That is, 3.4.2 User Benefits
for purposes of economic analysis, only transporta­
tion costs that are the direct result of the studied This refers to the advantages, privileges, and/or
improvement should be considered The components cost reductions that accrue to highway motor vehicle
of transportation improvement costs are defined as users (drivers or owners) through the use of a particu­
follows: lar transportation facility constructed a particular way
as compared with the use of another For pavement, at
Highway or Facility Investment Cost. Total in­ the project level, the comparison is between two pave­
vestment required to prepare a highway improvement ment strategies Benefits are generally measured in
for service, including engineering design and supervi­ terms of a decrease in user costs
Economic Evaluation o f Alternative Pavement Design Strategies 1-43

Incremental Cost. The net change in dollar costs equivalent annual costs equals the present value of all
directly attributable to a given decision or proposal project disbursements
compared with some other alternative (which could be
the existing situation, or the “ do-nothing” alterna­ Discount Rate (Interest Rate, Time Value o f
tive) This definition includes cost reductions that Money). A percentage figure—usually expressed as
result in negative incremental costs or, equivalently, an annual rate—representing the rate of interest money
incremental benefits To illustrate, if the existing, do- can be assumed to earn over the period of time under
nothing situation calls for no capital (investment) ex­ analysis A governmental unit that decides to spend
penditures and the particular improvement proposed money improving a highway, for example, loses the
would require a $1 million capital outlay, the incre­ opportunity to “ invest” this money elsewhere That
mental capital cost would be $1 million If, on the rate at which money could be invested elsewhere is
other hand, we are comparing two improvement alter­ sometimes known as the “ Opportunity Cost of Capi­
natives, A and B, where A costs $1 million and B tal” and is the appropriate discount rate for use in
costs $3 million, then the incremental cost of proposal economic studies Discount factors derived as a func­
B compared to A would be $2 million As another tion of the discount rate and time period relative to the
illustration, if current user costs associated with a present can be used to convert periodic benefits and
given highway facility are $100 per thousand vehicle costs for a project into present value or into equivalent
miles and a highway improvement would result in a uniform annual cost However, calculating benefits in
unit user cost of $80 per thousand vehicle miles, then constant dollars and using market rates of interest is
the incremental unit user cost would be minus $20 per an error because the market rate of return includes an
thousand vehicle miles (equivalent to a $20 per thou­ allowance for expected inflation Hence, if future ben­
sand vehicle mile benefit) The only costs that are efits and cost are calculated in constant dollars, only
relevant to a given proposal are incremental future the real cost of capital should be represented in the
costs, in contrast to sunk costs of the past, which are discount rate used The discount rate assumes annual
irrelevant to future decisions end-of-year compounding, unless otherwise specified
The sum of $100 in cash today is equivalent, at a
10-percent discount rate, to $110 a year from now,
Present Value (PV). An economic concept that
$121 at the end of the second year, and $259 37 at the
represents the translation of specified amounts of costs
end of the tenth year Correspondingly, a commitment
or benefits occurring in different time periods into a
to spend $259 37 in the tenth year discounted at
single amount at a single instant (usually the present)
10 percent has a present value of $100
Another name for present value is “ present worth ”
The term “ net present value” (NPV) refers to the net
Analysis Period. The length of time (usually the
cumulative present value of a series of costs and bene­
number of years) chosen for consideration and study
fits stretching over time It is derived by applying to
of incremental benefits and costs in an economic anal­
each cost or benefit in the series an appropriate dis­
ysis The final year of construction is usually desig­
count factor, which converts each cost or benefit to a
nated year 0 (zero) Subsequent years are designated
present value Two related considerations underlie the year 1, year 2, and so on Projects entailing stage
need for computing present values: (1) the fact that construction that extends over more than 4 or 5 years
money has an intrinsic capacity to earn interest over should, where possible, be divided into separate pro­
time (known as the time value of money) due to its jects for separable stages (for which separable benefits
productiveness and scarcity, and (2) the need in an can be ascertained) Where such is not possible, the
economic study for comparing or summing incre­ final year of construction for the first major stage
mental outlays or savings of money in different time should be used as year 0 Prior capital outlays should
periods be compounded to their present equivalent value in
year 0
Equivalent Uniform A nnual Cost (or Benefit).
A uniform annual cost (or benefit) that is the equiva­ Residual or Salvage Value. The value of an in­
lent, spread over the entire period of analysis, of all vestment or capital outlay remaining at the end of the
incremental disbursements or costs incurred on (or study or analysis period
benefits received from) a project Equivalent annual
cost (or benefit) is an obverse form of present value Project. Any relatively independent component
That is, the present value of the uniform series of of a proposed highway improvement By this defini-
1-42 Design of Pavement Structures

evaluation itself has no relationship to the sion, right-of-way acquisition, construction, traffic
method or source of financing a project control devices (e g , signals and signs), and land­
(3) An economic evaluation should consider many scaping
possible alternatives within the constraints of
time and design resources This includes the Highway M aintenance Cost. The cost of keeping
need for comparing alternatives, not only with a highway and its appurtenances in serviceable condi­
an existing situation, but with each other tion Changes in administrative costs that can be allo­
(4) Alternatives should be compared over the cated to a particular improvement should also be
same time period This time period should be included
chosen so that the factors involved in the
comparison can be defined with reasonable Highway User Costs. The sum of (1) motor
accuracy vehicle running cost, (2) the value of vehicle user
(5) The economic evaluation of pavements should travel time, and (3) traffic accident cost
include agency costs and user costs and bene­
fits if possible Motor Vehicle R unning Cost. The mileage-de­
pendent cost of running automobiles, trucks, and
Principle 5 is not normally stated for transport pro­
other motor vehicles on the highway, including the
jects because it is an accepted requirement However,
expense of fuel, tires, engine oil, maintenance, and
in the pavement field, the usual practice has been to
that portion of vehicle depreciation attributable to
consider only capital and maintenance costs, with the
highway mileage traveled Operating and ownership
implied assumption that user costs do not vary This
costs that do not vary with mileage are excluded from
approach is inadequate because, as demonstrated by
running cost, e g , license and parking fees, insurance
McFarland (30) and by Kher, et al (31), user costs
premiums, the time-dependent portion of deprecia­
can vary significantly with these factors Benefits can
tion, and any other costs of off-highway use
then be considered as cost reductions (32)
Value o f Travel Time. The result of vehicle travel
time multiplied by the average unit value of time
3.4 DEFINITIONS RELATED TO
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Vehicle Travel Time The total vehicle-hours of
time traveled by a specific type of vehicle
The definitions that follow include the principal
technical terms used in text of the AASHTO economic Unit Value o f Time. The value attributed to
analysis manual (37) The listing is broken down into 1 hour of travel time, usually different for passenger
two categories: economic analysis concepts or con­ cars and trucks
stants, and highway traffic characteristics The defini­
tions have been simplified in some cases for use with Traffic Accident Costs. The cost attributable to
pavement projects motor vehicle traffic accidents, usually estimated by
multiplying estimated accident rates by the average
cost per accident
3.4.1 Transportation Improvement Costs
User Costs The sum of highway user costs
This refers to the sum of highway investment cost,
highway maintenance cost, and highway user cost as­
sociated with a given highway improvement That is, 3.4.2 User Benefits
for purposes of economic analysis, only transporta­
tion costs that are the direct result of the studied This refers to the advantages, privileges, and/or
improvement should be considered. The components cost reductions that accrue to highway motor vehicle
of transportation improvement costs are defined as users (drivers or owners) through the use of a particu­
follows: lar transportation facility constructed a particular way
as compared with the use of another For pavement, at
Highway or Facility Investment Cost. Total in­ the project level, the comparison is between two pave­
vestment required to prepare a highway improvement ment strategies Benefits are generally measured in
for service, including engineering design and supervi­ terms of a decrease in user costs
Economic Evaluation o f Alternative Pavement Design Strategies 1-43

Increm ental Cost. The net change in dollar costs equivalent annual costs equals the present value of all
directly attributable to a given decision or proposal project disbursements
compared with some other alternative (which could be
the existing situation, or the “ do-nothing” alterna­ Discount Rate (Interest Rate, Time Value o f
tive) This definition includes cost reductions that Money). A percentage figure—usually expressed as
result in negative incremental costs or, equivalently, an annual rate—representing the rate of interest money
incremental benefits To illustrate, if the existing, do- can be assumed to earn over the period of time under
nothing situation calls for no capital (investment) ex­ analysis A governmental unit that decides to spend
penditures and the particular improvement proposed money improving a highway, for example, loses the
would require a $1 million capital outlay, the incre­ opportunity to “ invest” this money elsewhere That
mental capital cost would be $1 million If, on the rate at which money could be invested elsewhere is
other hand, we are comparing two improvement alter­ sometimes known as the “ Opportunity Cost of Capi­
natives, A and B, where A costs $1 million and B tal” and is the appropriate discount rate for use in
costs $3 million, then the incremental cost of proposal economic studies Discount factors derived as a func­
B compared to A would be $2 million As another tion of the discount rate and time period relative to the
illustration, if current user costs associated with a present can be used to convert periodic benefits and
given highway facility are $100 per thousand vehicle costs for a project into present value or into equivalent
miles and a highway improvement would result in a uniform annual cost However, calculating benefits in
unit user cost of $80 per thousand vehicle miles, then constant dollars and using market rates of interest is
the incremental unit user cost would be minus $20 per an error because the market rate of return includes an
thousand vehicle miles (equivalent to a $20 per thou­ allowance for expected inflation Hence, if future ben­
sand vehicle mile benefit) The only costs that are efits and cost are calculated in constant dollars, only
relevant to a given proposal are incremental future the real cost of capital should be represented in the
costs, in contrast to sunk costs of the past, which are discount rate used The discount rate assumes annual
irrelevant to future decisions end-of-year compounding, unless otherwise specified
The sum of $100 in cash today is equivalent, at a
10-percent discount rate, to $110 a year from now,
Present Value (PV). An economic concept that
$121 at the end of the second year, and $259 37 at the
represents the translation of specified amounts of costs
end of the tenth year Correspondingly, a commitment
or benefits occurring in different time periods into a
to spend $259 37 in the tenth year discounted at
single amount at a single instant (usually the present)
10 percent has a present value of $100
Another name for present value is “present worth ”
The term “ net present value” (NPV) refers to the net
Analysis Period. The length of time (usually the
cumulative present value of a series of costs and bene­
number of years) chosen for consideration and study
fits stretching over time It is derived by applying to
of incremental benefits and costs in an economic anal­
each cost or benefit in the series an appropriate dis­ ysis The final year of construction is usually desig­
count factor, which converts each cost or benefit to a
nated year 0 (zero) Subsequent years are designated
present value Two related considerations underlie the year 1, year 2, and so on Projects entailing stage
need for computing present values: (1) the fact that construction that extends over more than 4 or 5 years
money has an intrinsic capacity to earn interest over should, where possible, be divided into separate pro­
time (known as the time value of money) due to its jects for separable stages (for which separable benefits
productiveness and scarcity, and (2) the need in an can be ascertained) Where such is not possible, the
economic study for comparing or summing incre­ final year of construction for the first major stage
mental outlays or savings of money in different time should be used as year 0 Prior capital outlays should
periods be compounded to their present equivalent value in
year 0
Equivalent Uniform A nnual Cost (or Benefit).
A uniform annual cost (or benefit) that is the equiva­ Residual or Salvage Value. The value of an in­
lent, spread over the entire period of analysis, of all vestment or capital outlay remaining at the end of the
incremental disbursements or costs incurred on (or study or analysis period
benefits received from) a project Equivalent annual
cost (or benefit) is an obverse form of present value Project. Any relatively independent component
That is, the present value of the uniform series of of a proposed highway improvement By this defini-
1-44 Design o f Pavement Structures

tion, independent links of a large improvement pro­ The cost of in-place material in a pavement struc­
posal can be evaluated separately Where alternative ture is not directly proportional to the volume re­
construction improvements are being considered, quired Unit material price is dependent on material
separate projects can be defined quantity to be provided, construction procedure em­
ployed, length of project, etc Therefore, care should
Project Alternatives. Any variations to a basic be taken to estimate quantities and true expected costs
project plan that (1) entail significantly different carefully A 2-inch layer, for example, may not be
costs, (2) result in significantly different levels of twice as expensive as a 1-inch layer because the labor
service or demand, or (3) incorporate different route involved in each operation is the same Engineering
locations or other distinctive design features such as and administrative costs associated with the design
surfacing type should also be included

3.6.1 Maintenance Cost

3.5 FACTORS INVOLVED IN PAVEMENT
COSTS AND BENEFITS The estimation of all costs which are essential to
maintaining pavement investment at a desirable speci­
The major initial and recurring costs that should be fied level of service, or at a specified rate of deterio­
considered in the economic evaluation of alternative rating service, is essential to a proper economic
pavement strategies include the following: analysis The level of maintenance, i e , the type and
extent of maintenance operations, determines the rate
(1) Agency costs
of loss of riding quality or serviceability index
(a) Initial construction costs
(b) Future construction or rehabilitation costs There are various maintenance operations which
are carried out for a highway Maintenance of pave­
(overlays, seal coats, reconstruction,
ment, shoulders, drainage, erosion, vegetation, and
e tc )
structures, plus snow and ice control, are some of the
(c) Maintenance costs, recurring throughout
major categories For pavement economic analysis,
the design period
only those categories of maintenance which directly
(d) Salvage return or residual value at the
affect the performance of a pavement should be
end of the design period (which may be a
considered This normally includes maintenance of
“ negative cost” )
pavement surface, shoulders, and related drainage
(e) Engineering and administration costs
Some agencies refer to a category of “ major main­
(f) Traffic control costs if any are involved
tenance” ; we have chosen to stay with only two cate­
(2) User costs
gories, maintenance and rehabilitation, which include
(a) Travel time
all activities carried out subsequent to construction
(b) Vehicle operation
(c) Accidents
(d) Discomfort
(e) Time delay and extra vehicle operating 3.6.2 Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Cost
costs during resurfacing or major main­
Rehabilitation cost includes future overlays and/or
tenance
upgrading made necessary when the riding quality of
a pavement decreases to a certain minimum level of
acceptability, for example, a present serviceability
3.6 INITIAL CAPITAL COSTS index (PSI) of 2 5 For purposes of this report, resur­
(INVESTMENT COSTS) facing costs are included in the rehabilitation category

Computing the initial cost of construction involves Maintenance. As defined in Section 101 of
the calculation of material quantities to be provided in Title 23, U S Code, “ The preservation of the entire
each pavement structure and multiplication by their roadway, including surface, shoulders, roadside,
unit prices Material quantities are generally direct structures, and such traffic-control devices as are nec­
functions of their thicknesses in the structure They essary for its safe and efficient utilization ” Pavement
are also functions of thicknesses of other layers and maintenance then involves the preservation of the
the width of pavement and shoulders pavement including shoulders and related drainage
Economic Evaluation o f Alternative Pavement Design Strategies 1-45

Pavement Rehabilitation. Work undertaken to and rehabilitation, and salvage value, and (2) costs to
extend the service life of an existing facility This in­ the highway user including travel delays from lane
cludes placement of additional surfacing material closures and rough pavements, vehicle operation, ac­
and/or other work necessary to return an existing cidents, and discomfort Although difficulties exist in
roadway, including shoulders, to a condition of struc­ estimating these costs, it is believed that this approach
tural or functional adequacy This could include the will provide the best pavement for the lowest annual
partial removal and replacement of the pavement cost While available funding may not always permit
structure the lowest user cost improvement to be constructed,
Pavement rehabilitation work shall not include it is a good tool to use in evaluating the feasible al­
normal periodic maintenance activities Periodic ternatives
maintenance is interpreted to include such items as
resurfacing less than K-inch in thickness or of short
length; patching, filling potholes, sealing cracks and
3.6.3 Salvage or Residual Value
joints or repair of minor failures, and undersealing of
concrete slabs other than as an essential part of
Salvage or residual value is used by some agencies
rehabilitation, and other work intended primarily for
in economic evaluation It can be significant in the
preservation of the existing roadway
case of pavements because it involves the value of
Pavement rehabilitation projects should substan­
reusable materials at the end of the design period
tially increase the service life of a significant length of
With the depletion of resources, such materials can
roadway The following are a few examples of possible
become increasingly important in the future, espe­
pavement rehabilitation work appropriate for major
cially when used in a new pavement by reworking or
highway projects
reprocessing The practice of recycling pavements
(1) resurfacing to provide improved structural provides a dramatic and recognizable illustration of
capacity or serviceability (including in some the reasons for using salvage value, as well as a basis
cases cracking and seating), for determining it
(2) replacing or restoring malfunctioning joints, Salvage value of a material depends on several fac­
(3) substantial pavement undersealing when essen­ tors, such as volume and position of the material,
tial for stabilization, contamination, age or durability, anticipated use at the
(4) grinding or grooving of pavements to restore end of the design period, etc It can be represented as
smoothness or skid resistance, providing ade­ a percentage of the original cost
quate structural thickness remains; Salvage value can be relatively easy to calculate,
(5) removing and replacing deteriorated materials; however, the choice of values to be assigned will pose
(6) reworking or strengthening of bases or sub­ a problem for the analyst For example, what value to
bases; assign to a 15-year-old base or a moderately damaged
(7) recycling of existing materials; asphalt concrete which is 10 years old Such questions
(8) cracking and seating of PCC pavements with must be left to each agency until such time as objective
AC overlays; and methods based on structural analysis are developed
(9) adding underdrains
This list is not all-inclusive There are other items
that could be added which satisfy the above definition 3.6.4 User Cost
However, it is imperative that the definition be applied
consistently nationwide Each alternative pavement strategy is associated
The common practice of selecting a rehabilitation with a number of indirect or nonagency (soft) costs
technique only because it has the lowest initial con­ which accrue to the road user and must be considered
struction cost is a poor engineering practice and can for a rational economic analysis Such costs cannot be
lead to serious future pavement problems The consid­ ignored because, similar to pavement costs, user costs
eration of life-cycle costs is recommended in selecting are related to the roughness or serviceability history of
the preferred alternative The various costs of the the pavement A pavement strategy which provides an
pavement rehabilitation alternatives are the major con­ overall high level of roughness over a larger time per­
sideration in selecting the preferred alternative Life­ iod will result in a higher user cost than a strategy
cycle costs include (1) costs to the highway agency of which carries the traffic on a relatively smooth surface
initial design and construction, future maintenance for most of the time
1-46 Design of Pavement Structures

Three major types of user costs associated with a 3.6.6 Identification of Pavement Benefits
pavement’s performance are as follows
Pavement benefits accrue primarily from direct re­
(1) Vehicle operating cost ductions in transportation costs of the user, as listed in
(a) Fuel consumption the preceding section It is also possible to consider
(b) Tire wear benefits in terms of additional road user taxes gener­
(c) Vehicle maintenance ated by a project, but this has several deficiencies and
(d) Oil consumption is not recommended for pavement projects
(e) Vehicle depreciation In order to measure or calculate pavement benefits,
(f) Parts replacement it is necessary to define those pavement characteristics
(2) User travel time cost that will affect the previously noted user costs to
(3) Accident cost vehicle operation, travel time, accidents, and dis­
(a) Fatal accidents comfort These could include roughness, level of
(b) Nonfatal accidents serviceability, slipperiness, appearance, color, light
(c) Property damage reflection characteristics, and so on However, two
Each of the costs given above is a function of factors, serviceability (as it affects vehicle operating
roughness level as well as vehicle speed resulting costs, travel time costs, accident costs, and discomfort
from such roughness level As a pavement becomes costs) and slipperiness (as it affects accident costs)
rougher, the operating speeds of vehicles are generally have the major influence
reduced (41) Lower speeds and rough pavements (1) As serviceability decreases, travel time costs
result in higher travel time, discomfort, and other user increase because drivers slow down and aver­
costs This is alleviated to some degree by lower fuel age travel speed decreases (in a nonlinear
costs at the lower speeds (42) Since level of rough­ manner)
ness for a pavement strategy depends, among other (2) When rehabilitation occurs (i e , there is ma­
things, on its initial construction thicknesses and jor maintenance, resurfacing, or reconstruc­
materials provided, the extent and times of rehabilita­ tion), high travel time costs can occur because
tions, and the extent of major and minor maintenance of traffic delays during the construction
provided during its service life, user cost is inter­ (3) User benefits are not usually considered in
related with all of these factors making economic analyses for new construc­
tion or comparisons between alternative reha­
bilitation or treatments of pavements In most
economic analyses, user costs are considered
3.6.5 Traffic Delay Cost To User
as an added cost to the user as a pavement
deteriorates and, thus, are added to mainte­
Major maintenance or overlay placement is gener­
nance and construction cost However, when
ally accompanied by disturbance to normal traffic
establishing priorities, user benefits may be
flow and even lane closure This results in vehicle
considered For example, in evaluating two
speed fluctuations, stops and starts, and time losses
pavements to determine which pavement to
The extra user cost thus incurred can in certain cases
correct, user benefits could be included in the
become a significant factor in choice of designs and
decision criteria for a pavement management
may warrant its inclusion in the economic cost calcu­
system In effect, a benefit-cost ratio approach
lations Though this indirect (nonagency) cost is
could be considered as the basis for prioritiz­
sometimes considered to be a “ soft” cost, (i e , not a
ing the expenditure of funds for rehabilitation
part of the actual spending of an agency), it is cer­
or reconstruction
tainly borne by the road users and this justifies its
inclusion in the economic analysis
Broadly, traffic delay cost is a function of traffic
volume, road geometries, time and duration of overlay 3.6.7 Analysis Period
construction, road geometries in the overlay zone, and
the traffic diversion method adopted Cost is com­ The analysis period refers to the time for which the
prised of vehicle operating and user time values for economic analysis is to be conducted The analysis
driving slowly, fluctuating speeds, stopping, acceler­ period can include provision for periodic surface re­
ating, idling, and vehicle accidents newal or rehabilitation strategies which will extend
Economic Evaluation o f Alternative Pavement Design Strategies 1-47

the overall service life of a pavement structure to 30 or (2) What method of analysis is most understand­
50 years before complete reconstruction is required able to the decision-maker? This consideration
again represents reality For example, consider
an agency that has used a benefit-cost ratio
3.7 METHODS OF ECONOMIC method for some years, with a good degree of
EVALUATION subjective grasp of the results of the analysis
It may well be that this is not the best overall
There are a number of methods of economic analy­ method for their situation; however, changing
sis that are applicable to the evaluation of alternative to a better method could be quite difficult and
pavement design strategies lengthy
Another aspect of this consideration is the
(1) Equivalent uniform annual cost method, often level of decision-making involved (i e , at the
simply termed the “ annual cost method” network level or the project level) It is possi­
(2) Present worth method for: ble, for example, that a highway agency could
(a) costs, use the rate-of-return method for analyzing
(b) benefits, or its proposed investments over the network,
(c) benefits minus costs, usually termed the whereas a net present value analysis is used by
“ net present worth” or “ net present the pavement designer at the project level
value method” (3) What method best suits the requirements of the
(3) Rate-of-return method particular DOT involved? Although the net
(4) Benefit-cost ratio method present value method is preferable for provid­
(5) Cost-effectiveness method ing pavements, an annual cost method might
be more suitable for a privately provided pave­
A common feature of these methods is the ability to
ment (such as a large shopping complex)
consider future streams of costs (i e , methods 1, 2a,
(4) Are benefits included in the analysis? Any
and 5) or of costs and benefits (i e , methods 2c, 3,
method that does not consider the differences
and 4), so that alternative investments may be com­
in benefits between pavement alternatives is
pared Differences in the worth of money over time, as
basically incomplete for use by a public
reflected in the compound interest equations used,
agency However, for the previously mentioned
provide the means for such comparisons
private situation, an implicit assumption of
There are several basic considerations in selecting
equal benefits for various alternatives may be
the most appropriate (but not necessarily the best)
satisfactory
method for economic evaluation of alternative pave­
ment strategies It is useful to present these prior to
discussing details of the methods themselves and
3.8 DISCUSSION OF INTEREST RATES,
their advantages and limitations They include the
INFLATION FACTORS, AND
following:
DISCOUNT RATE
(1) How important is the initial capital expenditure
in comparison to future expected expendi­ Many authors have considered the effects of infla­
tures? Often, public officials and private inter­ tion and interest rates on economic analyses, includ­
ests (say in the case of paving a large parking ing Winfrey (32), Grant and Ireson (40), Wohl and
lot) are concerned primarily with initial costs Martin (34), and Sandler (38)
An economic analysis may indicate, for exam­ Of particular value is the lucid discussion pre­
ple, that a low capital expenditure today can sented by the last listed author (38) in his 1984 Trans­
result in excessive future costs for a particular portation Research Board paper, which is presented
alternative (of course, the opposite could also here for its applicable insight
occur) Yet the low capital expenditure is per­
haps the only consideration of relevance to
decision-making officials, especially if they do 3.8.1 Discounting and the Opportunity Cost
not know what funds they will have available of Capital
several years hence Such situations may not
represent good economy to the analyst, but The concept of life-cycle costing (LCC) should be
they do often represent reality understood to represent an economic assessment of
1-48 Design o f Pavement Structures

competing design alternatives, considering all signifi­ 3.8.2 Inflation

cant costs over the life of each alternative, expressed
in equivalent dollars (59) A significant key to LCC is The issue of how to deal with inflation in LCC
the economic assessment using equivalent dollars For studies is important because the procedure adopted for
example, assume one person has $1,000 on hand, an­ the treatment of inflation can have a decided effect on
other has $1,000 promised 10 years from now, and a the results of an analysis First, one must carefully
third is collecting $100 a year for 10 years Each has identify the difference between two types of price
assets of $1,000 However, are the assets equivalent? changes: general inflation and differential price
The answer is not so simple because the assets are changes The former may be defined as an increase in
spread across different periods of time To determine the general level of prices and income throughout the
whose assets are worth more, a baseline time refer­ economy Differential price change means the differ­
ence must first be established All dollar values are ence between the price trend of the goods and services
then brought back to the baseline, using proper eco­ being analyzed and the general price trend During the
nomic procedures to develop an equivalent dollar period of analysis, some prices may decline whereas
value Money invested in any form earns, or has the others remain fairly constant, keep pace with, or ex­
capacity to earn, interest; so that a dollar today is ceed the general trend in prices
worth more than the prospect of a dollar at some Distortions in the analysis caused by general infla­
future time The same principle applies when compar­ tion can be avoided by appropriate decisions regarding
the discount rate and the treatment of future costs The
ing the cost of various pavement design alternatives
discount rate for performing present value calcula­
over time Each alternative may have a different
tions on public projects should represent the opportu­
stream of costs which must be transformed into a
nity cost of capital to the taxpayer as reflected by the
single equivalent dollar value before a meaningful
average market rate of return However, the market or
comparison can be made The rate at which these
nominal rate of interest includes an allowance for ex­
alternative cost streams are converted into a single
pected inflation as well as a return that represents the
equivalent dollar value is referred to as the discount
real cost of capital For example, a current market rate
rate
of interest of 12 percent may well represent a 7-per-
The discount rate is used to adjust future expected
cent opportunity cost component and a 5-percent in­
costs or benefits to present day value It provides the flation component The practice of expressing future
means to compare alternative uses of funds, but it costs in constant dollars and then discounting these
should not be confused with interest rate which is costs using the market, or nominal, rate of interest is
associated with the costs of actually borrowing in error and will understate the LCC of an alternative
money Similarly, the practice of expressing future costs in
The time value of money concept applies far be­ inflated, or current dollars and then discounting the
yond the financial aspects of interest paid on borrowed costs using the real cost of capital would overstate the
money First of all, money is only a medium of LCC of an alternative
exchange which represents ownership of real re­ The distortion caused by general inflation may be
sources—land, labor, raw materials, plant, and equip­ neutralized in two ways One is to use the nominal rate
ment Second, the most important concept in the use of interest (including its inflation premium) for dis­
of a discount rate is the opportunity cost of capital (52, counting, while all costs are projected in inflated or
55) Any funds expended for a pavement project current dollars The other is to adjust the nominal rate
would not otherwise stand idle They are funds col­ of interest for inflation, discounting with the real rate
lected from the private sector, either by taxation or by component only, while measuring the cost stream in
borrowing, or from the government itself by diverting terms of constant dollars
funds from other purposes If left in the private sector, Because of the uncertainty associated with predict­
they can be put to use there and earn a return that ing future rates of inflation and in view of the similar
measures the value society places on the use of the results achieved by following either method, Sandler
funds If the funds are diverted to government use, the et al , elected to use a discount rate which represents
true cost of the diversion is the return that would the real cost of capital while calculating LCC in terms
otherwise have been earned That cost is the oppor­ of constant dollars Because it avoids the need for
tunity cost of capital and is the correct discount rate to speculation about inflation in arriving at the economic
use in calculating the LCC of various pavement design merit of a project, this is the generally accepted proce­
alternatives dure used in the engineering profession and is recom­
Economic Evaluation o f Alternative Pavement Design Strategies 1-49

mended by the U S Office of Management and ACX| n = equivalent uniform annual cost for
Budget alternative xt , for a service life or
The final choice of discount rate, interest, or infla­ analysis period of n years,
tion and the method of interpretation is left to each crfj n = capital recovery factor for interest
analyst or decision-maker Consultation with agency rate i and n years,
authorities and familiarity with policy will help pro­ = i(l + i)n/(l + i)n - 1,
vide appropriate values to use It should be empha­ (ICC)X) = initial capital costs of construction
sized that the final determination of the discount rate (including actual construction costs,
will have a significant impact on the results of the materials costs, engineering costs, etc ),
analysis (AAMO)X] = average annual maintenance plus
Although the distortions caused by general price operation costs for alternative x 1;
inflation can be easily neutralized, the issue of incor­ (AAUC)Xl = average annual user costs for
porating differential, or real, price changes into an alternative Xj (including vehicle
economic analysis is an extremely complex matter operation, travel time, accidents
Authorities, such as Winfrey (52), and Lee and Grant and discomfort if designated), and
(55, 40), have recommended the use of differential (SV)Xl,n = salvage value, if any, for
prices only when there is overwhelming or substantial alternative Xj at the end of n years
evidence that certain inputs, such as land costs, are
expected to experience significant changes relative to Equation (3 9 1) considers annual maintenance
the general price level Such circumstances seldom and operating costs, and user costs, on an average
relate to pavement costs and thus differential cost basis This can be satisfactory for many purposes
analysis should not be used with the Guide Where such costs do not increase uniformly, however,
an exponential growth factor can easily be applied

3.9 EQUATIONS FOR

3.9.2 Present Worth Method
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

For this report only the annual cost and present The present worth of costs method is directly com­
worth methods of analysis are presented because of parable to the equivalent uniform annual cost method
their wide applicability and acceptance The material for comparable conditions, e g , costs, discount rates,
has been adapted from Haas and Hudson (5), who and analysis periods The present worth method can
also present details of the remaining methods of eco­ consider either costs alone, benefits alone, or costs
nomic analysis for those who desire to compare meth­ and benefits together It involves the discounting of all
ods The AASHTO Manual on User Benefit Analysis future sums to the present, using an appropriate dis­
also presents comprehensive details for those desiring count rate The factor (5) for discounting either costs
more information (57) or benefits is

pwfi>n = 1/(1 + i)" (3 9 2)

3.9.1 Equivalent Uniform Annual
Cost Method where

The equivalent uniform annual cost method com­ pwfi n = present worth factor for a particular i
bines all initial capital costs and all recurring future and n,
expenses into equal annual payments over the analysis i = discount rate, and
period In equation form, this method may be ex­ n = number of years to when the sum will
pressed as (5): be expended, or saved

ACx„n = crfXl(ICC)Xl + (AAMO)Xl + (AAUC)X, Published tables for pwf, or the erf of equation
(3 9 1), are readily available in a wide variety of refer­
- crfj n(SV)Xl_n (3 9 1)
ences, including Winfrey (32)
The present worth method for costs alone can be
where expressed in terms of the following equation (5)
7-50 Design o f Pavement Structures

t=i Ri> R2» > Rj

TPWCXl n = (ICC)X1 + S pwfi,t = costs of first, second, , j th
t=0 resurfacings, respectively, and
* [(CC)Xlft + (MO)x>t + (UC)Xl,t] a l > a 2>
= ages at which the first, second,
- (SV)Xl,nPwfu (3 9 3) j th resurfacings occur, respectively

All other factors are as previously defined

where
The present worth of benefits can be calculated in
the same manner as the present worth of costs using
TPWCXl „ = total present worth of costs for
the following equation (5):
alternative x,, for an analysis period
of n years,
(ICC)X1 initial capital costs of construction, TPWBXl „ = ± pwf,,t
etc , for alternative xx, t=0
(CC)x„t capital costs of construction, etc ,
* [(DUB)X, t + (IUB)Xl>t + (NUB)Xlft] (3 9 5)
for alternative xls in year t, where
t is less than n,
pwfijt present worth factor for discount where
rate, i, for t years,
TPWBXl n = total present worth of benefits for
1/(1 + i)', alternative X! for an analysis period
(MO)Xlit maintenance plus operation costs for
of n years,
alternative x, in year t,
(DUB)X] t = direct user benefits accruing from
(UC)xl>t user costs (including vehicle
alternative x^ in year t,
operation, travel live, accidents, and
(IUB)Xl , = indirect user benefits accruing from
discomfort if designated) for
alternative Xj in year t, and
alternative x 1( in year t, and
(NUB)Xl>t = non-user benefits accruing from
(S V )x „n salvage value, if any, for alternative
project X! in year t
Xi, at the end of the design period,
n years
It is questionable, for pavements, whether or not
non-user benefits and indirect user benefits can be
Although the present worth of costs method is di­
measured adequately Consequently, it is perhaps rea­
rectly comparable to the equivalent uniform annual
sonable to consider only direct user benefits until such
cost method, it is only in recent years that it has begun
time as the state of the art is sufficiently advanced to
to be applied to the pavement field
allow the other factors to be measured
The present worth of costs is used in the equivalent
The net present value method follows from the
uniform annual cost method when additional capital
foregoing methods because it is simply the difference
expenditures occur before the end of the analysis
between the present worth of benefits and the present
period, i e , when the service life is less than the
worth of costs Obviously, benefits must exceed costs
analysis period; and future rehabilitation, such as
if a project is to be justified on economic grounds
overlays or seal coats, is needed The equation (5) for
The equation (5) for net present value is
this situation, as modified from that suggested by Bal-
dock (35) to include user costs, is:
NPVX1 = TPWBX| n TPWCX n (3 9 6)
ACXl>n = erf; n[(ICC)Xl + Ripwfi>a, + R2pwfj>a2
where
+ • • • + Rjpwfu . + (AAMO)Xl
+ (AAUC)X1 - crfi>n(SV)Xj n] (3 9 4) NPVXl = net present value of alternative X! (and
TPWBXl>n and TPWCx, n are as
where previously defined)

ACXj n = equivalent uniform annual cost for However, for a pavement project alternative, x,,
alternative X!, for an analysis period of equation (3 9 6) is not applicable directly to Xj itself
n years, but rather to the difference between it and some other
Economic Evaluation o f Alternative Pavement Design Strategies 1-51

suitable alternative, say x0 Considering only direct There are a number of advantages inherent in the
user benefits, these are then calculated as the user net present value method that make it perhaps the
savings (resulting from lower vehicle operating costs, most feasible for the highway field in comparison to
lower travel time costs, lower accident costs, and the “ traditional” annual cost and benefit-cost
lower discomfort costs) realized by x, over x„ methods These advantages include the following:
Thus, the net present value method can be applied
to pavements only on the basis of project comparison, (1) The benefits and costs of a project are related
where the project alternatives are mutually exclusive and expressed as a single value
When a project alternative is evaluated, it needs to be (2) Projects of different service lives, and with
compared not only with some standard or base alter­ stage development, are directly and easily
native but also with all the other project alternatives comparable
In the case of pavements, the base alternative may be (3) All monetary costs and benefits are expressed
that of no capital expenditures for improvements in present-day terms
(where increased maintenance and operation costs are (4) Nonmonetary benefits (or costs) can be evalu­
required to keep it in service) The equation form of ated subjectively and handled with a cost-
the net present value method for pavements (5) may effectiveness evaluation
(5) The answer is given as a total payoff for the
then be expressed as
project
(6) The method is computationally simple and
NPVX, = TPWC^ „ - TPWCXl,n (3 9 7) straightforward

There are several disadvantages to the net present

value method, including the following
where
(1) The method cannot be applied to single alter­
NPVXl = net present value of alternative x,, natives where the benefits of those single
and alternatives cannot be estimated In such
TPWC^ n = total present worth of costs, for cases, each alternative must be considered in
alternative x0 (where x0 can be the comparison to the other alternatives, including
standard or base alternative, or any the standard or base alternative
other feasible mutually exclusive (2) The results, in terms of a lump sum, may not
alternative X!, x2, , xk) for an be easily understandable to some people as a
analysis period of n years, and rate of return or annual cost In fact, the sum­
TPWCXl n is as previously defined mation of costs in this form can tend to act as a
deterrent to investment in some cases
The net present value method is preferred for the
Wohl and Martin (34) have extensively considered
transportation field by some writers, such as Wohl and
these advantages and disadvantages not only for the
Martin (34) Others, such as Winfrey (32), consider
net present value method, but also for other methods
that it has no particular advantage in economic studies
of economic analysis They conclude that the net
of highways Although there are certain limitations to
present value method is the only one that will always
the method, the advantages outweigh the disadvan­
give the correct answer The other methods may,
tages Thus, it is the preferred approach for evaluating
under certain situations, give incorrect or ambiguous
alternative pavement strategies when public invest­
answers
ments are involved Moreover, with increasing use of
this approach in the overall transport planning field,
its application to pavements will undoubtedly find
much greater acceptance in the next decade 3.9.3 Summary
In many cases, and for most agencies, however,
only equation (3 9 3) is used, without the user costs Either the net present worth value or the equivalent
term, either because the data are unavailable to relate uniform annual cost may be used to determine life­
user costs to pavement factors or because the policy is cycle costs for comparisons of alternate pavement de­
to consider only agency costs The comparison be­ sign or rehabilitation strategies In either case, it is
tween alternatives is conducted in such cases on the essential that comparisons only be made for analysis
basis of least total present worth of costs periods of equal length
 CHAPTER 4
RELIABILITY

4.1 DEFINITIONS Evaluation of reliability requires specific defini­

tions for each of the elements of definition 5 The
This section provides general definitions for the necessary definitions are given in Sections 4 1 2 -
concept of pavement design reliability and specific 4 13
definitions that are required for the evaluation of [* N ote : Design period in this chapter, as in other
reliability locations in this Guide, refers to the performance
period or period of time elapsed as initial or rehabili­
tated pavement structure deteriorates from its initial to
4.1.1 General Definition of Reliability its terminal serviceability ]

The following are general definitions that have

been selected from the highway research literature; 4.1.2 Definition of Designed Pavement Section

(1) “ Reliability is the probability that service­ Design Equation. For the purpose of this discus­
ability will be maintained at adequate levels sion, a designed pavement section is defined to be a
from a user’s point of view, throughout the section that is designed through the use of a specific
design life of the facility” (25) design equation The equation is assumed to be an
(2) “ Reliability is the probability that the load explicit mathematical formula for predicting the num­
applications a pavement can withstand in ber of ESAL that the section can withstand (Wt) be­
reaching a specified minimum serviceability fore it reaches a specified terminal level of
level is not exceeded by the number of load serviceability (pt) Predictor variables (design factors)
applications that are actually applied to the in the equation can be put in one or another of four
pavement” (26) categories:
(3) “ Reliability is the probability that the pave­
ment system will perform its intended function (1) pavement structure factors (PSF), such as sub­
over its design life (or time) and under the base thickness,
conditions (or environment) encountered dur­ (2) roadbed soil factors (RSF) such as roadbed soil
ing operation” (27) resilient modulus,
(3) climate-related factors (CRF) such as drainage
Definitions 1 ,2 , and 3 above are stated in terms of coefficients, and
serviceability (PSI) An analogous definition for other (4) pavement condition factors (PCF), such as
measures of pavement condition might be stated as terminal PSI
follows
The design equation may be written in the form:
(4) Reliability is the probability that any particular
type of distress (or combination of distress
manifestations) will remain below or within Wt = f(PSF, RSF, CRF, PCF) (4 1 1)
the permissible level during the design life
wherein every design factor and the mathematical
A final summary description of the reliability con­
form of the function “ f ” are completely specified
cept is given by the following definition:
Such design equations for flexible and rigid pave­
(5) The reliability of a pavement design-perform- ments are given in Chapter 1, Section 1 2
ance process is the probability that a pavement
section designed using the process will per­ Initial Substitutions. Use of the design equation
form satisfactorily over the traffic and environ­ to arrive at a structural design involves the following
mental conditions for the design period * steps:

1-53
1-54 Design o f Pavement Structures

(1) insertion of nominal values for the pavement 4.1.3 Definition of Pavement Condition,
condition factors, (PCF), Accumulated Axle Loads, and
(2) use of local climatic data to estimate values for Pavement Performance Variables
the climate-related factors (CRF) and insertion
of these values, This section defines three types of variables that
(3) use of on-site roadbed soil data to estimate val­ are essential to the definition of reliability The vari­
ues for roadbed soil factors (RSF) and inser­ ables represent (1) pavement condition, (2) axle load
tion of these values, accumulations, and (3) pavement performance The
(4) use of relevant traffic and loadOmeter data, and discussion includes variables that were necessarily in­
specified equivalence factors to predict the troduced in Section 4 1 2 so that the designed pave­
total number of ESAL’s, wx, that the section ment section could be completely defined
will receive over the design period of T years,
and Definition o f Pavement Condition and Accum u­
(5) multiplication of the traffic prediction, wT, by lated A xle Load Variables. The only measure of
a reliability design factor, FR, that is greater pavement condition that will be considered here is a
than or equal to one, and substitution of present serviceability index, denoted by PSI or p,
F r X wx for Wt in the design equation whose value at a particular time depends upon the
extent of surface roughness and manifestations of dis­
tress such as cracking, rutting, and faulting over the
Wt = Fr x wx or Fr = Wt/wx (4 1 2) length of the design section Formulas for flexible and
rigid pavement indexes are given in References 3
and 4
Thus, the design equation may be written as follows The measure of axle load applications that will be
used is the number of 18-kip equivalent single axle
loads (ESAL) that have accumulated from the start to
FR X wx = f(PSF, RSF, CRF, PCF) (4 1 3) some point during the design period This accumula­
tion is denoted by N
The serviceability history of a pavement section is
where all italicized factors and variables now have represented by the plot of p versus N as shown in
specific numerical values Further discussion and de­ Figure 4 1 for two sections, A and B A design period
tails for the reliability factor, FR, are given in Sec­ of T years is also indicated
tion 4 2 For design purposes and reliability calculations,
only three points on the (p, N) serviceability curve are
Selection o f Pavement Structure Design. Equa­ of concern
tion (4 1 3) or its nomograph may now be used to
(1) At the start of the design period
identify one or more combinations of materials and
thicknesses (PSF) that will satisfy the reduced design
equation Selection of a final design from the identi­ P — Pi (generally somewhat greater than 4 0)
fied alternatives is based on engineering and eco­
N = 0
nomic analysis

Final Specifications fo r the Designed Pavement (2) When the section’s serviceability reaches a
Section. It is assumed that fixed values have been terminal or minimum allowable level and must
specified for all relevant factors, such as shoulder and be overlaid or reconstructed
traffic lane features, that are not accounted for di­
rectly by the design equation p = pt, generally assumed to be 2 0 or 2 5 for
It is also assumed that materials and construction design,
specifications have been prepared for all design fac­
N = Nt
tors in the equation and for all supporting factors such
as material quality Use of quality control measures
will then produce a degree of compliance between the As shown in Figure 4 1, Section A reaches its
as-constructed values and the input design values of terminal serviceability (pt) before (and Section
all controlled factors B after) the end of the design period
Reliability 1-55
1-56 Design o f Pavement Structures

(3) At the end of the design period for sections all other design factors in the equation Thus,
whose serviceability index still exceeds pt performance as predicted by the design equa­
tion is:
p = p2
Predicted Performance (to PSI = pt)
N = Nx
= log Wt = Predicted log Nt
In this case, p! — p2 is the extent of service­
ability loss over the design period, T, rather In the design process discussed in Section 4 1 2 ,
than pi — p, W, is replaced by a multiple (FR) of wT, where wT is a
predicted value for NT, the actual number of design
As was explained in Section 4 1 2, the pavement
period ESAL This means that the pavement section is
design process requires a prediction, wT, of design
designed to have
period ESAL, NT Thus,

Predicted Performance = log Wt

wx (predicted) = g X NT(actual)
= log (F r X wT) = log wT + log F r (4 1 5)
where g represents prediction uncertainty which,
based on past experience, may range from less than V2 where
to more than 2 (28); i e , the actual traffic may range
from xti to 2 timesthe predicted traffic asmeasured in
terms of ESAL

Definition o f Pavement Performance. There are and

two elements to the definition of pavement perform­
ance:
log F r > 0
(1) Actual Performance Relative to Specified
Terminal Serviceability. When PSI (p) is used
Thus log F r is a positive “ spacing factor” between
as a measure of pavement condition, there are
log wT and log Wt, i e ,
at least two indicators that might be used to
represent total performance of the pavement
section One would be based on the total area log F r = (log Wt - log wT) > 0 (4 1 6 )
between the serviceability curve and the line
p = p, The other indicator would be based
only upon the actual number, N„ of applica­ 4.2 VARIANCE COMPONENTS AND
tions “ withstood” by the section before its RELIABILITY DESIGN FACTOR
serviceability reached p, All ensuing discus­
sion of reliability will be based on the latter 4.2.1 Components of Pavement
indicator Specifically, performance relative to Design-Performance Variability
a specified terminal serviceability level
As far as reliability is concerned, the pavement
design-performance process involves three major
Actual Performance (to PSI = pt)
steps:
= log.o N t (4 1 4)
(1) Prediction, wx, of actual design period ESAL,
Nx,
The logarithm is used to induce normality in (2) Multiplication of wx by a selected reliability
the probability distributions for the analysis to design factor, FR > 1, and
be discussed in Section 4 2 2 (3) Prediction of actual pavement performance,
(2) Predicted Performance The pavement design Nt, by Wt = wx X F r through a design
equation (4 1 1 ) gives a predicted value, Wt, equation that expresses Wt as a function of
for Nt when specific values are substituted for pavement design factors
Reliability 1-57

The three steps involve four basic points and inter­ tic assurance that log Nt will exceed log Nx, i e , that
vals on ESAL and log ESAL scales as shown in Figure the overall deviation will be positive
4 2 The first point is for actual design period traffic
(N t and log Nx); the second is for predicted traffic
(wT and log wx) The third and fourth points are for
pavement performance, predicted (log Wt) and actual 4.2.2 Probability Distributions of
(log Nt) The actual performance of a single pavement Basic Deviations
section is shown at the top of the figure
The three (log ESAL) intervals formed by the four It is assumed that the set of all possible outcomes
basic points are shown as basic (level 1) deviations for each of the chance deviations would produce a
and are as follows normal probability distribution as shown in Figure
(1) Prediction error in design period traffic: 4 3 The distribution for 8(Nxwt) is shown at upper
left and represents all traffic prediction errors that can
be generated by repeated predictions for a given Nx,
(log wT — log Nx) = ± 8 (N X, wx) and for a wide range of Nx values If the prediction
procedure is unbiased, then the set of all possible
(2) Reliability design factor (log): deviations, 8(Nxwx) will have mean value zero and
variance Sj, (say) Thus Sw is an average (root
mean square) or “ to be expected” value of 8(Nxwx)
(log W, - log wT) = F log F r and is called the standard error of design period traffic
prediction
The probability distribution for 8(W tNt) is shown
(3) Prediction error in pavement performance
at upper right and represents all performance predic­
tion errors that can be generated by construction of
(log Nt - log Wt) = ± 8 (W tNt) many pavement sections for a given log Wt = log wx
+ log Fr , and for a wide range of Wt values Again, if
the prediction procedure is unbiased, then the set of
The fourth basic deviation is the sum of the first
all possible deviations, 8(W tNt) will have mean value
three, both geometrically and algebraically
zero and (root mean square) average value SN (say)
(4) Overall deviation of actual section perform­ Thus, SN is the standard error of performance predic­
ance from actual design period traffic: tion, and Sn is the variance of the distribution of
all possible deviations of performance predictions
(log W,) from corresponding actual performances
(log Nt - log Nx) = ± 5 0
(log Nt) of pavement sections
The probability distribution for 80, shown at the
At the design stage, the designer has control over bottom of Figure 4 3, represents the set of all possible
log FR but cannot know either the size or the direction overall deviations that arise from corresponding pairs
(sign) of the other deviations For ease of presenta­ of 8(Nxwx) and 8(W tNt) Since 80 = (Nxwx) + log
tion, only positive deviations are shown in Figure 4 2, Fr + 8(W tNt) for every such pair, 8„ is composed one
but each of the remaining ( + or —) combinations are fixed deviation (log FR) and two chance deviations
equally likely For example, it might turn out that all that are each normally distributed For this situation,
of Nt, wx, and Wt are to the left of Nx The only the laws of probability are that 80 also follows a nor­
guarantee is that Wt will equal or exceed wx since FR mal probability distribution whose mean is the sum of
is equal to or greater than one by definition Thus, log the three deviate means and whose variance is the sum
F r is a controlled variation, the remaining deviations of the three deviate variances Thus,
are all “ chance” variations
The overall deviation, 80, will be positive when­
ever the actual performance (log Nt) of a pavement 80 = 8(Nxwt) + log F r + 8(W tNt)
section exceeds the corresponding actual design per­
iod traffic (log Nx), i e , for all sections that = 0 + log FR + 0 = log F r
“ survive” the design period traffic by having p greater
than p, at the end of T years As will be explained, the
reliability design factor is used to provide probabilis­ and
1-58 Design o f Pavement Structures

le.ve,i

te rm in al s e r v ic e a b ilit y level

♦D esig n Period-»|
■Vtears
T

-* E5 A L
Nr u r -f W±
BASIC
POINTS: ActuaI Pred ic-ted D es Eqn A ctual
Design D esig n Prediction ESAL.
(E S A L )
P e rio d Period tor ESAL to Rl
ESAL. E .S A L . to P^
■4 lo t E5AL
BASIC log M r lofl UJj - log W t
'3 f t
POINTS: A c tu a l Predicted P red icted A c tu a I
Loq -S e c tio n S e c tio n
(ta3 C 5* g T r a f f iic^ Rsr fo rm a n a e ‘P erfo rm an ce.

BASIC DEVIATIONS: * ~ - S (NTurT)'* «" log P r. “* * - £ S (W ,N t ) H

(Level 1 ) Prediction Error R elia b ility Prediction Error
in Design ftriad Desiqn Factor in Section
T ra ffic (loq) 0 ,) f t r fo r mane e-
BASIC DEVIATION: * - * S 0 - ± 5 ( ^ 7 - ) + Log F* ------►
(L e v e l O ) O verall deviation o f Actual Secfion f t r f o r -
mance. from Actual Oesiqn ftn'od T ra ffic -'
S o “ (lo g N t - f°g N t )
- S o means section Survival o f Design
oeaocL ESAL

Figure 4.2. Basic Points and Deviations for Design-Performance Reliability

Reliability 1-59
1-60 Design o f Pavement Structures

sl = sl + o + s 2n of ZR values corresponding to specific levels of relia­

bility) Algebraic manipulation of equation (4 2 3)
gives:
since log FR is fixed by design and has no chance
variation O f particular interest is the point where
80 = 0 Since 80 = (log N, — log NT), this point is log Fr = - Z r X S0 (4 2 4)
where actual performance (log Nt) equals actual de­
sign period traffic (log NT) All points having 80 > 0
correspond to pavement sections that survive (p > pt) or
the design period traffic

Fr = 1 0 -ZrXS° (4 2 5)
4.2.3 Formal Definition of Reliability Level and
Reliability Design Factor
either of which may be regarded as an algebraic defi­
The probability distribution for the overall design- nition for the reliability design factor Values for FR
performance deviation (80) is repeated in greater de­ are tabulated in Table EE 9 of Appendix EE, Volume
tail in Figure 4 4 and is the basis for formal definitions 2 for a wide range of reliability levels (R) and overall
of design-performance reliability and the reliability variances, S„
design factor The following summary paragraphs bring out or
The stippled area above the range S0 > 0 corres­ emphasize salient features of the reliability design
ponds to the probability that Nt > NT, i e , that a process that has been presented
pavement section will survive the design period traffic (1) Some level of reliability is implicit in every
with p > pt This probability is defined to be the pavement design procedure The methods pre­
reliability level, R/100, of the design-performance sented simply make it possible to design at a
process, where R is expressed as a percent Thus, the predetermined level of reliability If, for exam­
formal definition of reliability is givenby: ple, the designer substitutes the traffic predic­
tion (wT) directly into the design equation for
R (percent) = 100 X Prob[Nt > Nx] Wt, then Fr = 1 and log FR = 0 Figure 4 4
shows that the distribution of 8„ will then be
= 100 X Prob[80 > 0 ] (4 2 1) centered over 80 = 0, and that R will then
be 50 percent The designer is thereby taking
To calculate R and to evaluate the reliability design a 50-50 chance that the designed sections
factor (log Fr ) it is necessary to change the 80 scale to will not survive the design period traffic with
the corresponding Z-scale for a standard normal devi­ P ^ Pt
ate by the relationship: (2) Log Fr is the positive part of 8 0 (see Figure
4 3) that “ counteracts” negative errors in both
the traffic prediction, 8(N xwT), and perform­
Z = (80 - 80)/S0 ance prediction, 8(W tNt) Geometrically, log
= (80 - log F r)/S0 (4 2 2) Fr is a “ spacer” that governs how much of the
left tail of the 8(W tNt) distribution will aver­
age to extend past Nx For convenience, FR is
At the point where 80 = 0, Z becomes ZR (say) where applied as a multiplier of the traffic prediction
(wx), but the value of FRdepends (see equation
4 2 5) both on the reliability level (R) that is
ZR = ( - l o g F r)/S0 (4 2 3)
selected and the value of S02, the overall stand­
ard deviation Since S0 = S^, + Sn, Fr ac­
For a given reliability level, say R equal 90 percent, counts not only for chance variation in the
ZR can be found in standard normal curve area tables traffic prediction (Sj,) but also for chance vari­
and corresponds to the tabulated tail area from —oo to ation in actual performance (S n ) Moreover,
(100 - R)/100 If R equal 90 percent, the tables show Sj, and Sn by definition account for all chance
ZR = - 1 28 for 10-percent tail area (For conven­ variation in the respective predictions Thus,
ience, Table 4 1 is provided here to allow the selection So and log FR provide for all chance variation
Reliability 1-61
1-62 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 4.1. Standard Normal Deviate (ZR) Values ation (S0) suitable to his own specific conditions In
Corresponding to Selected Levels of doing so, the appendix identifies variance estimates
Reliability for each of the individual factors associated with the
performance prediction models (including the vari­
Reliability, Standard Normal
ance in future traffic projections) and subsequently
R (percent) Deviate, ZR
arrives at overall variance and standard deviation esti­
50 -0 000 mates which may be used as interim criteria
60 -0 253
(1) The estimated overall standard deviations for
70 -0 524
the case where the variance of projected future
75 -0 674
traffic is considered (along with the other vari­
80 -0 841
ances associated with the revised pavement
85 -1 037
performance models) are 0 39 for rigid pave­
90 -1 282
ments and 0 49 for flexible pavements
91 -1 340
(2) The estimated overall standard deviations for
92 -1 405
the case when the variance of projected future
93 -1 476
traffic is not considered (and the other vari­
94 -1 555
ances associated with the revised pavement
95 -1 645
performance models are 0 34 for rigid pave­
96 -1 751
ments and 0 44 for flexible pavements)
97 -1 881
(3) The range of S0 values provided in Part II (Sec­
98 -2 054
tion 2 1 3 ) are based on the values identified
99 -2 327
above
99 9 -3 090
99 99 -3 750 0 30-0 40 Rigid Pavements
0 40-0 50 Flexible Pavements
The lower end of each range, however, corresponds
in the design-performance process and at a roughly to the estimated variances associated with the
known level of reliability AASHO Road Test and the original pavement per­
formance models presented in the previous (1972 and
Finally, the (level 1) variances and S& can be
1981) Design Guides
decomposed, respectively, into hierarchies of variance
N ote It is useful to recognize that inherent in the
components at levels 2, 3, and 4 The decompositions
S0 values identified in (1) and (2) above is a means for
are given in Appendix EE, Volume 2, where numeri­
the user to specify an overall standard deviation (SQ)
cal estimates are given in Table EE 4 for flexible pave­
which better represents his ability to project future 18-
ments, in Table EE 5 for rigid pavements, and in
kip ESAL traffic If, because of an extensive traffic
Table EE 6 for traffic predictions For example, level
count and weigh-in-motion program, one state is ca­
4 components are measures of chance variation in in­
pable of projecting future traffic better and therefore
dividual design factors such as surfacing thickness
has a lower traffic variance (than that identified in
and roadbed soil modulus The appendix gives guid­
Appendix EE of Volume 2), then that state might use
ance for user estimation of each component at each
an SQ-value somewhere between the values identified
level Thus, the user may make new estimates for any
in (1) and (2) For example, for rigid pavements,
component and finally arrive at a new estimate for S„
where S0 (low) is 0 34 and S„ (high) is 0 39, a value of
that is applicable to local conditions Nomographs for
0 37 or 0 38 could be used
the design equations (see Part II, Chapter 3) provide
for a range of S0 values at any reliability level, R

4.4 CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF

4.3 CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF RELIABILITY LEVEL
OVERALL STANDARD DEVIATION
The selection of an appropriate level of reliability
As just discussed, Appendix EE of Volume 2 pro­ for the design of a particular facility depends primar­
vides the guidance necessary for any user to develop ily upon the projected level of usage and the conse­
levels of overall variance (So) or overall standard devi­ quences (risk) associated with constructing an initially
Reliability 1-63

thinner pavement structure If a facility is heavily traf­ conditions may affect the level of risk and, therefore,
ficked, it may be undesirable to have to close or even the optimum reliability
restrict its usage at future dates because of the higher
levels of distress, maintenance, and rehabilitation as­
sociated with an inadequate initial thickness On the 4.5 RELIABILITY AND STAGE
other hand, a thin initial pavement (along with the CONSTRUCTION ALTERNATIVES
heavier maintenance and rehabilitation levels) may be
acceptable, if the projected level of usage is such that When considering reliability in stage construction
fewer conflicts can be expected or “ planned rehabilitation” design alternatives, it is
One means of identifying appropriate design relia­ important to consider the effects of compound relia­
bility levels is to evaluate the reliability inherent in bility Unless this is recognized, the overall reliability
many of the current pavement design procedures This of say a 2-stage strategy (each stage designed for a
approach was used to develop the suggested levels of 90-percent reliability level) would be 0 90 X 0 90 or
reliability presented in Part II (Section 2 1) They 81 percent Such a strategy could not be compared
were derived by surveying the inherent reliability of equally with a single-stage strategy designed for
many current state DOT design procedures consider­ 90-percent reliability
ing the functional class of the facility and whether its Referring to the formal definition in Section 4 2 3,
environment was rural or urban (see Volume 2, Ap­ reliability is basically the probability that a given
pendix II) Although this approach is sound in that it pavement structure will survive the design (perform­
is based on a considerable amount of past experience, ance) period traffic with p > pt This definition is
it does not provide a means for selecting a unique level applicable to the fundamental case where the design
of reliability for a given project This requires a more period for the initial structure is equivalent to the anal­
detailed consideration of usage and the risk of prema­ ysis period For cases where the initial design period
ture failure is less than the desired analysis period, stage con­
Figure 4 5 provides a graph illustrating the concept struction or planned rehabilitation is required (for the
behind this detailed approach to identifying an opti­ design strategy to last the analysis period) and the
mum level of reliability for a particular design project definition of reliability must be expanded to include
Three curves are shown in the figure The first, curve the uncertainty associated with the additional stage(s)
(A), represents the effects of reliability on the cost Assuming that the probability of one stage lasting its
(expressed in net present value or equivalent uniform design period is independent of that of another stage,
annual cost) of the initial pavement structure, as de­ the probability or overall reliability that all stages will
sign reliability increases, so does the required initial last their design periods (or that the strategy will last
pavement thickness and its associated cost The sec­ the entire analysis period) is the product of the indi­
ond, curve (B), xepresents the effects of reliability on vidual stage reliabilities
the future distress-related costs (maintenance, rehabil­ Thus, in order to achieve a certain overall design
itation, user delay, etc ) The third, curve (C), repre­ reliability (Roveraii) in a particular design strategy, the
sents the sum total of the first two curves Since the following equation should be applied to establish the
objective is to minimize the total overall cost, the opti­ individual reliability (Rstage) required to design each
mum reliability for a given project corresponds to the stage:
minimum value on curve (C)
It should be recognized that this optimum reliabil­
ity is applicable only to the level of usage and conse­ Rstage = (Rovera„)'/n (4 5 1)
quences (risk) of failure associated with a particular
project Although other design projects may have the where n is equal to the number of stages including that
same level of usage, varying soil and environmental of the initial pavement structure
1-64 Design o f Pavement Structures

($ )
Annual Cost
Uniform
Equivalent
or
Present Value

R e lia b ility (P e rce n t)

Figure 4.5. Illustration of Approach to Identifying the Optimum Reliability Level for a Given Facility
 CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY

This chapter concludes Part I of the Guide, the part outlined in Part II and Part III do not include eco­
which explains general concepts related to pavement nomics per se After alternative designs are developed
design and performance Every attempt has been with the Guide, they should be compared with a true
made to provide the potential users of the Guide with economic analysis, as outlined in Chapter 3 This, of
useful background information related to (1) design course, includes the comparisons of life-cycle costs
inputs, (2) pavement management, (3) economics, and and is best done in the context of a good complete
(4) reliability O f course, it is not possible to give project level PMS methodology, such as SAMP-6 (36)
complete details on any of these subjects in this Guide, and FPS-13 (5), to name a few
and the users of the Guide are encouraged to examine Chapter 4 covers the very important area of relia­
the Appendices and to review important references bility and its application in pavement design The
which are cited herein for explicit detail for their spe­ users of the Guide should remember that much of the
cific needs misunderstanding of pavement design, and the result­
This Guide can, and hopefully will, be used by ing pavement failures for the past 20 years, have been
many pavement agencies ranging from the federal associated with uncertainty and the resulting lack of
level through the states to counties and cities For this reliability in design Any design method based on
reason, flexibility has been provided to adapt the average conditions has only a 50-percent chance of
Guide to your use However, many new developments fulfilling its required performance life The associated
and concepts are also presented in the Guide Please appendices present a rational and straightforward ap­
consider carefully these new aspects before you dis­ proach to this problem We realize this is complex
card them or modify them in favor of existing meth­ material, but users of the Guide should try to under­
ods Change is not easy, but nationwide experience stand and use this section of the Guide The reliability
has shown the need to modify this Guide, and its ap­ methodologies discussed here are used in Parts II
plication to your agency probably also deserves some and III
changes or at least serious consideration of change Having completed the reading and studying of Part
Chapter 1 of Part I addresses the detailed design I, the user will move on to Part II—New Design, and
factors and inputs required for using the Guide The Part III—Rehabilitation in the Guide Care should also
application and determination of final design details be exercised in the proper review of the related Ap­
will be accomplished by using the methodologies pendices, which provide additional background mate­
which are presented in Part II for New Design and in rial Good pavement design is not simple It cannot be
Part III for Rehabilitation Design It is important that done on the back of an envelope Please realize that a
you carefully review Chapter 1 and Parts II and III of reasonable degree of complexity is involved, but the
the Guide before you undertake any specific design Guide can be used successfully with study, training,
activities and careful application of engineering expertise
Chapter 2 of the Guide describes the relationships Part IV of the Guide provides more detail concern­
between pavement design and pavement management ing the background of pavement theory and the possi­
with particular attention to the pavement management ble application of such mechanistic methods to future
system (PMS) at the project level The users of the pavement design or to special cases of difficult design
Guide should continue to study the relationship of requiring more detailed study Reading and study of
design to pavement management and consider using Part IV can be very useful to the serious pavement
the Guide’s nomographs and equations as the appro­ designer A second volume resulting from the efforts
priate models for the design subsystem of PMS in is also being made available Volume 2 will provide
their agencies detailed background on how the Guide and the design
Chapter 3 examines the economic aspects of pave­ equations were developed, including the analytical
ment design and rehabilitation The design activities and empirical basis thereof

1-65
 REFERENCES FOR PART I

1 Smith, R , Darter, M , and Herrin, M , 12 Moulton, L K , “ Highway Subdrainage De­

“ Highway Pavement Distress Identification sign,” Federal Highway Administration, Re­
Manual,” Federal Highway Administration, port No FHWA-TS-80-224, August 1980
Report FHWA-79-66, March 1979 (reprinted 1982)
2 “AASHTO Interim Guide for Design of 13 Thompson, D , “ Improving Subdrainage and
Pavement Structures—1972,” published by Shoulders of Existing Pavements,” Report No
American Association of State Highway and FHWA/RD/077, State of the Art, 1982
Transportation Officials 14 Johnson, T C , Berg, R L , Carey, K L , and
3 Carey, W , and Irick, P , “ The Pavement Serv­ Kaplan, C W , “ Roadway Design in Seasonal
iceability—Performance Concept,” Highway Frost Areas,” NCHRP Synthesis in Highway
Research Board Special Report 6 IE, AASHO Practice, Report 26, 1974
Road Test, pp 291-306, 1962 15 Yoder, E , and Witczak, M , “ Principles of
4 Carey, W , and Irick, P , “The Pavement Serv­ Pavement Design,” Second Edition, John
iceability—Performance Concept,” Highway Wiley & Co , pp 179-180
Research Board Record 250, 1960 16 Linell, K A , Hennion, F B , and Lobacy,
5 Haas, R , and Hudson, W R , “ Pavement E F , “ Corps of Engineers’ Pavement Design
Management Systems,” Krieger Publishing in Areas of Seasonal Frost,” Highway Re­
Company, Malabor, Florida, 1982 search Board Record 33, pp 76-136, 1963
6 Heukelom, W , and Klomp, A J G , “ Dy- 17 The AASHO Road Test—Report 5—Pavement
namic Testing as a Means of Controlling Pave­ Research,” Highway Research Board, Special
ments During and After Construction,” Report 61E, p 107, 1962
Proceedings of the First International Confer- 18 Finn, F N , Saraf, C L , Kulkarni, R , Nair,
ence on Structural Design of Asphalt Pave­ K , Smith, W , and Abdullah, A , “ Develop­
ments, University of Michigan, 1962 ment of Pavement Structural Subsystems,”
7 The Asphalt Institute, “ Research and Develop­ Final Report NCHRP 1-10, February 1977
ment of the Asphalt Institute’s Thickness De- 19 Hudson, W R , Finn, F N , Pedigo, R D , and
sign Manual, Ninth Edition,” Research Report Roberts, F L , “ Relating Pavement Distress to
No 82-2, pp 60-, 1982 Serviceability and Performance,” Report No
8 Federal Highway Administration, “ Technical FHWA RD 80/098, July 1980
Guidelines for Expansive Soils in Highway 20 Finn, F N , Nair, K , and Hilliard, J , “ Mini­
Subgrades” FHWA-RD-79-51, June 1979 mizing Premature Cracking in Asphaltic Con­
9 Terrel, R L , Epps, J , Barenberg, E J , crete Pavement,” NCHRP Report 195, 1978
Mitchell, J , and Thompson, M , “ Soil Stabi- 21 Thompson, M R , and Cation, K , “ Charac­
lization in Pavement Structures—A User’s terization of Temperature Effects for Full
Manual, Volume 1, Pavement Design and Con­ Depth AC Pavement Design,” Department of
struction Considerations ” Civil Engineering, University of Illinois, Illi­
10 Terrel, R L , Epps, J , Barenberg, E J , nois Cooperative Highway Research Program,
Mitchell, J , and Thompson, M , “ Soil Stabi­ IRH-510, October 1984
lization in Pavement Structures—A User’s 22 Cedergren, H R , et al , “ Guidelines for
Manual, Volume 2, Mixture Design Consider­ Design of Subsurface Drainage Systems for
ations,” FHWA Report IP 80-2, October 1979 Highway Structural Sections,” FHWA-RD-72-
11 Ridgeway, H H , “ Pavement Subsurface 30, 1972
Drainage Systems,” NCHRP Synthesis of 23 Ridgeway, H H , “ Infiltration of Water
Highway Practice, Report 96, November Through the Pavement Surface,” Transporta­
1982 tion Research Board Record 616, 1976

1-67
1-68 Design o f Pavement Structures

24 The Asphalt Institute, “Asphalt Overlays and 32 Winfrey, R , “ Economic Analysis for High­
Pavement Rehabilitation,” Manual Series No ways,” International Textbook Company,
17, November 1969 1969
25 Lemer, A C , and Noavenzadeh, F , “ Reliabil­ 33 Lee, R R,, and Grant, E L , “ Inflation and
ity of Highway Pavements,” Highway Research Highway Economy Studies,” Highway Re­
Record No 362, Highway Research Board, search Board Record 100, 1965
1971 34 Wohl, M , and Martin, B , “ Evaluation of
26 Kher, R K , and Darter, M I , “ Probabilistic Mutually Exclusive Design Projects,” High­
Concepts and Their Applications to AASHO way Research Board Special Report 92, 1967
Interim Guide for Design of Rigid Pavements,” 35 Baldock, R H , “The Annual Cost of High­
Highway Research Record No 466, Highway ways,” Highway Research Board Record 12,
Research Board, 1973 1963
27 Darter, M I , and Hudson, W R , “ Probabilis­ 36 Lytton, R L , and McFarland, W F , “ Systems
tic Design Concepts Applied to Flexible Approach to Pavement Design-Implementation
Pavement System Design,” Research Report Phase,” Final Report: Prepared for Highway
123-18, Center for Transportation Research, Research Board, NCHRP, National Academy
University of Texas at Austin, 1973 of Sciences, March 1974
28 Deacon, J A , and Lynch, R L , “ Deteriora­ 37 AASHTO, “A Manual on User Benefit Analy­
tion of Traffic Parameters for the Prediction, sis of Highway and Bus-Transit Improve­
Projection, and Computation of EWL’s,” Final ments,” 1977
Report KYHPR-64-21 HPR-1(4), Kentucky 38 Sandler, R D , “A Comparative Economic
Highway Department, 1968 Analysis of Asphalt and Concrete Pavements,”
29 Hudson, W R , Haas, R , and Pedigo, R D , Transportation Research Board, January 1984
“ Pavement Management System Develop­ 39 Dellisola, A J , and Kirk, S J , “ Life Cycle
ment,” NCHRP Report 215, November 1979 Costing for Design Professionals,” McGraw-
30 McFarland, W F , “ Benefit Analysis for Pave­ Hill Book Co , New York, 1982
ment Design Systems,” Res. Report 123-13, 40 Grant E L , Ireson, W G , and Leavenworth,
jointly published by Texas Highway Depart­ R J , “ Principles of Engineering Economy,”
ment, Texas Transportation Institute of Texas 6th Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Co , New
at Austin, April 1972 York, 1976, p 293
31 Kher, R , Phang, W A , and Haas, R C G , 41 Karan, M A , Haas, R , and Kher, R ,
“ Economic Analysis Elements in Pavement “ Effects of Pavement Roughness on Vehicle
Design,” Highway Research Board Record Speeds,” Transportation Research Board
572, 1976 Record 602, 1976
 PART II
PAVEMENT DESIGN PROCEDURES
FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
OR RECONSTRUCTION
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

This chapter first discusses the background relative (b) The layer coefficients for the various
to the development of pavement design procedures for materials are defined in terms of resilient
new construction and reconstruction This is followed modulus as well as standard methods
by a brief discussion of the scope of Part II Next, the (CBR and R-value)
limitations of the design procedures are discussed (c) The environmental factors of moisture
followed by the concluding section, which briefly dis­ and temperature are objectively included
cusses the organization of this Part in the Guide so that environmental con­
It is assumed in this text that the reader has studied siderations could be rationally accounted
Part I, “ Pavement Design and Management Prin­ for in the design procedure This ap­
ciples” prior to applying the design procedures de­ proach replaced the subjective regional
scribed herein The basic principles are contained in factor term previously used
Part I (d) Reliability is introduced to permit the de­
signer to use the concept of risk analysis
for various classes of roadways
1.1 BACKGROUND (e) Stage construction (i e , planned re­
habilitation) design procedures are
One of the major objectives of the AASHO Road incorporated
Test was to provide information that could be used in (2) The following modifications are made in the
developing pavement design criteria and pavement de­ design procedures for rigid pavements
sign procedures Accordingly, following completion (a) Reliability concepts identical to those
of the Road Test, the AASHO Design Committee, used for the flexible pavements are in­
through its Subcommittee on Pavement Design Prac­ troduced
tices, developed the AASHO Interim Guide fo r the (b) The environmental aspects of design are
Design o f Rigid and Flexible Pavements The Guide introduced in the same format as for
was based on the results of the AASHO Road Test flexible pavements
supplemented by existing design procedures and, in (c) The design procedure is modified to in­
the case of rigid pavements, available theory clude such factors as tied shoulders, sub­
After the Guide was used for a few years by the base erosion, and lean subbase designs
states, the AASHTO Design Committee, in 1972, is­
The material from the 1972 version is reorganized
sued the AASHTO Interim Guide fo r Design o f Pave­
and presented in a new format, as described in Part I
ment Structures that incorporated experience that had
of this Guide Basically, the approach is to describe
accrued since the original issue of the Guide In 1981,
the input, present the design equation (nomographs,
the rigid pavement portion of the Guide (Chapter III)
etc ), and, finally, describe the results of the design
was revised
process
This issue of the Guide contains the following mod­
ifications to the 1981 version, which were defined by
the Subcommittee on Pavement Design Practices
1.2 SCOPE
(1) The following modifications are included in
the flexible pavement design procedures: The procedure contained herein is basically an ex­
(a) The soil support number is replaced by tension of the algorithms originally developed from
the resilient modulus to provide a ra­ the AASHO Road Test The extensions provide the
tional testing procedure that may be used designer with the opportunity to use the latest state of
by an agency to define the material prop­ the art techniques If all the inputs of the AASHO
erties Road Test are entered into the design procedures, the

II-3
11-4 Design o f Pavement Structures

results will be the same as from those equations devel­ and axle configurations, as opposed to mixed
oped at the AASHO Road Test traffic
The material contained in this Part deals with the
These basic limitations are reduced to some extent
design of a new roadway or reconstruction of an exist­
by experiences of various agencies which have been
ing one The concepts of stage construction are also incorporated into this edition of the Guide, as well as
presented to provide the designer with the option of into previous editions
examining numerous alternatives for selection of an
optimum pavement design strategy for a facility.
Part II also permits the designer to account for 1.4 ORGANIZATION
pavement serviceability loss resulting from both traf­
fic loads and environment The environmental aspects Basically, the material contained herein is pre­
are considered in terms of both their direct and indi­ sented in a modular form First, the procedures for
rect effects on the serviceability index The direct major highways are presented These are then fol­
environmental effects are in terms of swelling and lowed by the design procedures for low-volume roads
frost heave of the roadbed soil, while the indirect ef­ Although this Guide is not intended to be a user’s
fects are in terms of the seasonal variation of material manual for computer application, the material is
properties and their impact on traffic load associated presented in a format suitable for utilization with the
serviceability loss The designer has the option of not computer Computer programs are available for solv­
considering either of these environmental factors, if ing the basic equations and generating multiple design
so desired strategies so that the designer may select an optimum
economical solution These programs are not, how­
ever, documented in this Guide Thus, the designer
must refer to other AASHTO documents for user man­
1.3 LIMITATIONS uals The version presented in this Part is basically a
simplified approach in which nomographs are used to
The limitations inherent in the original AASHO solve the basic equations If the designer solves an
Road Test equations are still applicable: extensive array of problems, he will arrive at the same
optimum solution as the computer approach
(1) specific set of pavement materials and one In addition to the design chart procedure, a simpli­
roadbed soil, fied approach is provided for the design of low-
(2) single environment, volume roads Basically, it consists of a catalog of
(3) an accelerated procedure for accumulating designs which requires a minimum of user input This
traffic (a 2-year testing period extrapolated to a is intended to be used as a guideline by those agencies
10- or 20-year design), and with minimal available funds for design It is not in­
(4) accumulating traffic on each test section by tended to serve as a replacement for a rigorous design
operating vehicles with identical axle loads procedure
 CHAPTER 2
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

This chapter discusses the preparation and/or Reinforcement Variables. This category covers
selection of the inputs required for new (or recon­ all the reinforcement design variables needed for the
structed) pavement design Since this chapter ad­ different types of rigid (PCC) pavements considered
dresses the design requirements for several types of
pavement structures on both highways and low- Important. Because of the treatment of reliability
volume roads, only certain sets of inputs are required in this Guide (as discussed in Part I and later in this
for a given structural design combination Table 2 1 section), it is strongly recommended that the designer
identifies all possible design input requirements and use mean (average) values rather than “ conservative
indicates the specific types of structural designs for estimates” for each of the design inputs required by
which they are required A one (1) means that a par­ the procedures This is important since the equations
ticular design input (or set of inputs) must be deter­ were developed using mean values and actual varia­
mined for that structural combination A two (2) tions Thus, the designer must use mean values
indicates that the design input should be considered and standard deviations associated with his or her
because of its potential impact on the results Under conditions
the “ Flexible” heading, AC refers to asphalt concrete
surfaces and ST to surface treatments Under
“ Rigid,” JCP refers to plain jointed concrete pave­ 2.1 DESIGN VARIABLES
ment, JRCP to jointed reinforced concrete pavement,
CRCP to continuously reinforced concrete pavement, 2.1.1 Time Constraints
and PCP to prestressed concrete pavements PCP is
not shown as a column in Table 2 1, however, since This section involves the selection of performance
detailed design input requirements are not available at and analysis period inputs which affect (or constrain)
this time pavement design from the dimension of time Consid­
For ease of description these inputs are classified eration of these constraints is required for both high­
under five separate categories: way and low-volume road design Time constraints
permit the designer to select from strategies ranging
Design Variables. This category refers to the set from the initial structure lasting the entire analysis
of criteria which must be considered for each type of period (i e , performance period equals the analysis
road surface design procedure presented in this Guide period) to stage construction with an initial structure
and planned overlays
Performance Criteria. This represents the user-
specified set of boundary conditions within which a Performance Period. This refers to the period of
given pavement design alternative should perform, time that an initial pavement structure will last before
e g , serviceability it needs rehabilitation It also refers to the perform­
ance time between rehabilitation operations In the
design procedures presented in this Guide, the per­
Material Properties fo r Structural Design. This formance period is equivalent to the time elapsed as a
category covers all the pavement and roadbed soil new, reconstructed, or rehabilitated structure deterio­
material properties that are required for structural rates from its initial serviceability to its terminal serv­
design iceability For the performance period, the designer
must select minimum and maximum bounds that are
Structural Characteristics. This refers to certain established by agency experience and policy It is im­
physical characteristics of the pavement structure portant to note that in actual practice the performance
which have an effect on its performance period can be significantly affected by the type and

II-5
11-6 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 2.1. Design R equirem ents for the D ifferent Initial Pavement Types th a t can be Considered
Flexible Rigid
Aggr.
Description AC ST JC P /JR C P CRCP S urf.
2 1 DESIGN VARIABLES
2 1 1 Time Constraints
Performance Period 1 1 1 1 1
Analysis Period 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 2 Traffic 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 3 Reliability 1 1 1 1
2 1 4 Environmental Impacts
Roadbed Swelling 2 2 2 2
Frost Heave 2 2 2 2
2 2 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
2 2 1 Serviceability 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 Allowable Rutting 1
2 2 3 Aggregate Loss 1
2 3 MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN
2 3 1 Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus 1 1 1
2 3 2 Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 1 1
2 3 3 Pavement Layer Materials Characterization 2 2 1 1 1
2 3 4 PCC Modulus of Rupture 1 1
2 3 5 Layer Coefficients 1 1
24 PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS
2 4 1 Drainage
Flexible Pavements 1 1
Rigid Pavements 1 1
2 4 2 Load Transfer
Jointed Pavements 1
Continuous Pavements 1
Tied Shoulders or Widened Outside Lanes 2 2
2 4 3 Loss of Support 1 1
2 5 REINFORCEMENT VARIABLES
2 5 1 Jointed Pavements
Slab Length 1
Working Stress 1
Friction Factor 1
2 5 2 Continuous Pavements
Concrete Tensile Strength 1
Concrete Shrinkage 1
Concrete Thermal Coefficient 1
Bar Diameter 1
Steel Thermal Coefficient 1
Design Temperature Drop 1
Friction Factor 1
AC—Asphalt Concrete CRCP—Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement
ST—Surface Treatment 1—Design input variable that must be determined
JCP—Jointed Concrete Pavement 2—Design variable that should be considered
JRCP—Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavement
Design Requirements I 1-7

level of maintenance applied The predicted perform­ Highway Analysis Period

ance inherent in this procedure is based on the mainte­ Conditions (years)
nance practices at the AASHO Road Test
High-volume urban 30-50
The minimum performance period is the shortest High-volume rural 20-50
amount of time a given stage should last For example, Low-volume: paved 15-25
it may be desirable that the initial pavement structure Low-volume aggregate
last at least 10 years before some major rehabilitation surface 10-20
operation is performed The limit may be controlled
by such factors as the public’s perception of how long
a “ new” surface should last, the funds available for
initial construction, life-cycle cost, and other engi­
2.1.2 Traffic
neering considerations
The maximum performance period is the maximum
The design procedures for both highways and low-
practical amount of time that the user can expect from
volume roads are all based on cumulative expected
a given stage For example, experience has shown in
18-kip equivalent single axle loads (ESAL) during
areas that pavements originally designed to last 20 the analysis period (w18) The procedure for convert­
years required some type of rehabilitation or resurfac­ ing mixed traffic into these 18-kip ESAL units is
ing within 15 years after initial construction This presented in Part I and Appendix D of this Guide
limiting time period may be the result of PSI loss due Detailed equivalency values are given in Appendix D
to environmental factors, disintegration of surface, For any design situation in which the initial pavement
etc The selection of longer time periods than can be structure is expected to last, the analysis period with­
achieved in the field will result in unrealistic designs out any rehabilitation or resurfacing, all that is re­
Thus, if life-cycle costs are to be considered accu­ quired is the total traffic over the analysis period If,
rately, it is important to give some consideration to the however, stage construction is considered, i e , reha­
maximum practical performance period of a given bilitation or resurfacing is anticipated (due to lack of
pavement type initial funds, roadbed swelling, frost heave, etc ), then
the user must prepare a graph of cumulative 18-kip
ESAL traffic versus time, as illustrated in Figure 2 1
Analysis Period. This refers to the period of time This will be used to separate the cumulative traffic
for which the analysis is to be conducted, i e , the into the periods (stages) during which it is encoun­
tered
length of time that any design strategy must cover The
The predicted traffic furnished by the planning
analysis period is analogous to the term “ design life”
group is generally the cumulative 18-kip ESAL axle
used by designers in the past Because of the consider­
applications expected on the highway, whereas the
ation of the maximum performance period, it may be
designer requires the axle applications in the design
necessary to consider and plan for stage construction
lane Thus, unless specifically furnished, the designer
(i e , an initial pavement structure followed by one or
must factor the design traffic by direction and then by
more rehabilitation operations) to achieve the desired
lanes (if more than two) The following equation may
analysis period be used to determine the traffic (w18) in the design
In the past, pavements were typically designed and lane:
analyzed for a 20-year performance period since the
original Interstate Highway Act in 1956 required that
traffic be considered through 1976 It is now recom­ w 18 = D d x D L x wm
mended that consideration be given to longer analysis
periods, since these may be better suited for the evalu­
ation of alternative long-term strategies based on where
life-cycle costs Consideration should be given to ex­
tending the analysis period to include one rehabilita­ D d = a directional distribution factor, expressed
tion For high-volume urban freeways, longer analysis as a ratio, that accounts for the
periods may be considered Following are general distribution of ESAL units by direction,
guidelines: e g , east-west, north-south, etc ,
11-8 Design o f Pavement Structures

Cumulative 18-kip ESAL Traffic (Millions)

Tim e (years)

Figure 2.1. Example Plot of Cumulative 18-kip ESAL Traffic Versus Time
Design Requirements II-9

DL = a lane distribution factor, expressed as a Table 2.2. Suggested Levels of Reliability for
ratio, that accounts for distribution of Various F unctional Classifications
traffic when two or more lanes are
Recommended
available in one direction, and Level of
w 18 = the cumulative two-directional 18-kip Reliability
ESAL units predicted for a specific Functional
section of highway during the analysis Classification U rban R ural
period (from the planning group) Interstate and Other Freeways 85-99 9 80-99 9
Principal Arterials 80-99 75-95
Although the D d factor is generally 0 5 (50 per­ Collectors 80-95 75-95
cent) for most roadways, there are instances where Local 50-80 50-80
more weight may be moving in one direction than the
N o t e : Results based on a survey of the AASHTO Pavement
other Thus, the side with heavier vehicles should be Design Task Force
designed for a greater number of ESAL units Experi­
ence has shown that D d may vary from 0 3 to 0 7,
depending on which direction is “ loaded” and which
is “ unloaded” to the facilities which receive the most use, while the
For the DL factor, the following table may be used lowest level, 50 percent, corresponds to local roads
as a guide: As explained in Part I, Chapter 4, design-perform­
ance reliability is controlled through the use of a relia­
bility factor (Fr ) that is multiplied times the design
N um ber of Lanes Percent of 18-kip ESAL period traffic prediction (w18) to produce design ap­
in Each Direction in Design Lane plications (W18) for the design equation For a given
reliability level (R), the reliability factor is a function
1 100
of the overall standard deviation (SQ) that accounts for
2 80-100
both chance variation in the traffic prediction and nor­
3 60-80
mal variation in pavement performance prediction for
4 50-75
a given W 18
It is important to note that by treating design uncer­
tainty as a separate factor, the designer should no
longer use “ conservative” estimates for all the other
design input requirements Rather than conservative
2.1.3 Reliability values, the designer should use his best estimate of
the mean or average value for each input value The
Reliability concepts were introduced in Chapter 4 selected level of reliability and overall standard devia­
of Part I and are developed fully in Appendix EE of tion will account for the combined effect of the varia­
Volume 2 Basically, it is a means of incorporating tion of all the design variables
some degree of certainty into the design process to Application of the reliability concept requires the
ensure that the various design alternatives will last the following steps
analysis period The reliability design factor accounts (1) Define the functional classification of the facil­
for chance variations in both traffic prediction (w18) ity and determine whether a rural or urban
and the performance prediction (WI8), and therefore condition exists
provides a predetermined level of assurance (R) that (2) Select a reliability level from the range given
pavement sections will survive the period for which in Table 2 2 The greater the value of reliabil­
they were designed ity, the more pavement structure required
Generally, as the volume of traffic, difficulty of (3) A standard deviation (S0) should be selected
diverting traffic, and public expectation of availability that is representative of local conditions Val­
increases, the risk of not performing to expectations ues of SGdeveloped at the AASHO Road Test
must be minimized This is accomplished by selecting did not include traffic error However, the per­
higher levels of reliability Table 2 2 presents recom­ formance prediction error developed at the
mended levels of reliability for various functional Road Test was 25 for rigid and 35 for flexible
classifications Note that the higher levels correspond pavements This corresponds to a total stand­
11-10 Design o f Pavement Structures

ard deviation for traffic of 0 35 and 0 45 for trucks) which use the facility The primary measure of
rigid and flexible pavements, respectively serviceability is the Present Serviceability Index
(PSI), which ranges from 0 (impossible road) to 5
(perfect road) The basic design philosophy of this
2.1.4 Environmental Effects Guide is the serviceability-performance concept,
which provides a means of designing a pavement
The environment can affect pavement performance
based on a specific total traffic volume and a mini­
in several ways Temperature and moisture changes
mum level of serviceability desired at the end of the
can have an effect on the strength, durability, and
performance period
load-carrying capacity of the pavement and roadbed
Selection of the lowest allowable PSI or terminal
materials Another major environmental impact is the
serviceability index (pt) is based on the lowest index
direct effect roadbed swelling, pavement blowups,
that will be tolerated before rehabilitation, resurfac­
frost heave, disintegration, etc , can have on loss of
ing, or reconstruction becomes necessary Anindex of
riding quality and serviceability Additional effects,
2 5 or higher is suggested for design of major high­
such as aging, drying, and overall material deteriora­
ways and 2 0 for highways with lesser traffic volumes
tion due to weathering, are considered in this Guide
One criterion for identifying a minimum level of serv­
only in terms of their inherent influence on the pave­
iceability may be established on the basis of public
ment performance prediction models
acceptance Following are general guidelines for mini­
The actual treatment of the effects of seasonal tem­
mum levels of p, obtained from studies in connection
perature and moisture changes on material properties
with the AASHO Road Test (14)
is discussed in Section 2 3, “ Material Properties for
Structural Design ” This section provides only the cri­
teria necessary for quantifying the input requirements Terminal Percent of People
for evaluating roadbed swelling and frost heave If
Serviceability Level Stating Unacceptable
either of these can lead to a significant loss in service­
ability or ride quality during the analysis period, 30 12
then it (they) should be considered in the design 2 5 55
analysis for all pavement structural types, except 2 0 85
perhaps aggregate-surfaced roads As serviceability-
based models are developed for such factors as pave­
ment blowups, then they may be added to the design For relatively minor highways where economics
procedure dictate that the initial capital outlay be kept at a mini­
The objective of this step is to produce a graph of mum, it is suggested that this be accomplished by
serviceability loss versus time, such as that illustrated reducing the design period or the total traffic volume,
in Figure 2 2 As described in Part I, the service­ rather than by designing for a terminal serviceability
ability loss due to environment must be added to that less than 2 0
resulting from cumulative axle loads Figure 2 2 indi­ Since the time at which a given pavement structure
cates that the environmental loss is a result of the reaches its terminal serviceability depends on traffic
summation of losses from both swelling and frost volume and the original or initial serviceability (p0),
heave The chart may be used to estimate the service­ some consideration must also be given to the selection
ability loss at intermediate periods, e g , at 13 years of p0 (It should be recognized that the p0 values ob­
the loss is 0 73 Obviously, if only swelling or only served at the AASHO Road Test were 4 2 for flexible
frost heave is considered, there will be only one curve pavements and 4 5 for rigid pavements )
on the graph The environmental serviceability loss is Once p0 and pt are established, the following equa­
evaluated in detail in Appendix G, “Treatment of tion should be applied to define the total change in
Roadbed Swelling and/or Frost Heave in Design ” serviceability index

2.2 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA

APSI = p0 - p,
2.2.1 Serviceability

The serviceability of a pavement is defined as its The equation is applicable to flexible, rigid, and ag­
ability to serve the type of traffic (automobiles and gregate-surfaced roads
Design Requirements 11-11

Cumulative Serviceability Loss for Swelling and Frost Heave

Time (years)

Figure 2.2. A Conceptual Example of the Environmental Serviceability Loss Versus Time Graph that
may be Developed for a Specific Location
11-12 Design o f Pavement Structures

2.2.2 Allowable Rutting GL =

(B/25 4)/( 0045LADT + 3380 6/R + 0 467G)
In this design guide, rutting is considered only as a
performance criterion for aggregate-surfaced roads where
Although rutting is a problem with asphalt concrete
surface pavements, no design model suitable for in­ GL = aggregate loss, in inches, during the
corporation into this Guide is available at this time It period of time being considered,
is important to note that the rut depth failure predicted B = number of bladings during the period
by the aggregate-surfaced road model does not refer to of time being considered,
simple surface rutting (which can be corrected by nor­ LADT = average daily traffic in design lane
mal blading operations), but to serious rutting associ­ (for one-lane road use total traffic in
ated with deformation of the pavement structure and both directions),
roadbed support The allowable rut depth for an ag­ R = average radius of curves, in feet, and
gregate-surfaced road is dependent on the average G = absolute value of grade, in percent
daily traffic Typically, allowable rut depths range
from 1 0 to 2 0 inches for aggregate-surfaced roads Another equation, developed through a British
study done in Kenya, is more applicable to areas
where there is very little truck activity and thus the
facility is primarily used by cars Since this equation
2.2.3 Aggregate Loss (below) is for annual gravel loss, the total gravel loss
(GL) would be estimated by multiplying by the num­
For aggregate-surfaced roads, an additional con­ ber of years in the performance period
cern is the aggregate loss due to traffic and erosion
When aggregate loss occurs, the pavement structure AGL = [T2/(T2 + 50)]
becomes thinner and the load-carrying capacity is
reduced This reduction of the pavement structure X f (4 2 + 092T + 0 889R2 + 1 88VC)
thickness increases the rate of surface deterioration
To treat aggregate loss in the procedure, it is neces­ where
sary to estimate (1) the total thickness of aggregate
that will be lost during the design period, and (2) the AGL = annual aggregate loss, in inches,
minimum thickness of aggregate that is required to T = annual traffic volume in both directions,
in thousands of vehicles,
keep a maintainable working surface for the pavement
R = annual rainfall, in inches,
structure
VC = average percentage gradient of the road,
Unfortunately, there is very little information avail­
and
able today to predict the rate of aggregate loss Below
f = 037 for lateritic gravels,
is an example of a prediction equation developed with
= 043 for quartzitic gravels,
limited data on sections experiencing greater than
= 028 for volcanic gravels, and
50 percent truck traffic (15, 16):
= 059 for coral gravels

It should be noted that there are serious drawbacks

GL = 0 12 + 0 1223(LT)
with all the equations shown here, therefore, when­
ever possible, local information about aggregate loss
should be used as input to the procedure
where

GL = total aggregate loss in inches, and 2.3 MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR

LT = number of loaded trucks in thousands STRUCTURAL DESIGN

A second equation, which was developed from a 2.3.1 Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus
recent study in Brazil on typical rural sections, can be
employed by the user to determine the input for gravel As discussed previously in this Part and Part I, the
loss (15, 16) basis for materials characterization in this Guide is
Design Requirements 11-13

elastic or resilient modulus For roadbed materials, sary to specify a time interval of less than one-half
laboratory resilient modulus tests (AASHTO T 274) month for any given season If it is not possible to
should be performed on representative samples in adequately estimate the season lengths, the user may
stress and moisture conditions simulating those of the refer to Section 4 1 2 , which provides criteria sug­
primary moisture seasons Alternatively, the seasonal gested for the design of low-volume roads
resilient modulus values may be determined by corre­ At this point, the length of the seasons and the
lations with soil properties, i e , clay content, mois­ seasonal roadbed resilient moduli are all that is re­
ture, PI, etc The purpose of identifying seasonal quired in terms of roadbed support for the design of
moduli is to quantify the relative damage a pavement rigid pavements and aggregate-surfaced roads For the
is subjected to during each season of the year and treat design of flexible pavements, however, the seasonal
it as part of the overall design An effective roadbed data must be translated into the effective roadbed soil
soil resilient modulus is then established which is resilient modulus described earlier This is accom­
equivalent to the combined effect of all the seasonal plished with the aid of the chart in Figure 2 3 The
modulus values (The development of the procedure effective modulus is a weighted value that gives the
for generating an effective roadbed soil resilient mod­ equivalent annual damage obtained by treating each
ulus is presented in Appendix HH of Volume 2 of this season independently in the performance equation and
G u id e) summing the damage It is important to note, however,
The seasonal moisture conditions for which the that the effective roadbed soil resilient modulus deter­
mined from this chart applies only to flexible pave­
roadbed soil samples should be tested are those which
ments designed using the serviceability criteria It is
result in significantly different resilient moduli For
not necessarily applicable to other resilient modulus-
example, in a climate which is not subjected to ex­
based design procedures
tended sub-freezing temperatures, it would be impor­
Since a mean value of resilient modulus is used,
tant to test for differences between the wet (rainy) and
design sections with coefficient of variations greater
dry seasons It would probably not be necessary, how­
than 0 15 (within a season) should be subdivided into
ever, to test for the difference between spring-wet and
smaller sections For example, if the mean value of
fall-wet, unless there is significant difference in the
resilient modulus is 10,000 psi, then approximately
average rainfall during spring and fall If operations
99 percent of the data should be in a range of 5,500 to
make it difficult to test the roadbed soil for spring- 14,500 psi
thaw or winter-frozen conditions, then, for these The first step of this process is to enter the seasonal
extreme cases, practical values of resilient moduli of moduli in their respective time periods If the smallest
20,000 to 50,000 psi may be used for frozen condi­ season is one-half month, then all seasons must be
tions, and for spring-thaw conditions, the retained defined in terms of half months and each of the boxes
modulus may be 20 to 30 percent of the normal modu­ must be filled If the smallest season is one month,
lus during the summer and fall periods then all seasons must be defined in terms of whole
Two different procedures for determining the months and only one box per month may be filled in
seasonal variation of the modulus are offered as The next step is to estimate the relative damage (uf)
guidelines One method is to obtain a laboratory rela­ values corresponding to each seasonal modulus This
tionship between resilient modulus and moisture con­ is done using the vertical scale or the corresponding
tent Then, with an estimate of the in situ moisture equation shown in Figure 2 3 For example, the rela­
content of the soil beneath the pavement, the resilient tive damage corresponding to a roadbed soil resilient
modulus for each of the seasons may be estimated An modulus of 4,000 psi is 0 51
alternate procedure is to back calculate the resilient Next, the uf values should all be added together
modulus for different seasons using the procedure de­ and divided by the number of seasonal increments
scribed in Part III using deflections measured on in- (12 or 24) to determine the average relative damage
service pavements These may be used as adjustment The effective roadbed soil resilient modulus (MR),
factors to correct the resilient modulus for a reference then, is the value corresponding to the average relative
condition damage on the MR uf scale Figure 2 4 provides an
Besides defining the seasonal moduli, it is also nec­ example of the application of the effective MR estima­
essary to separate the year into the various component tion process Again, it is emphasized that this effec­
time intervals during which the different moduli are tive M r value should be used only for the design of
effective In making this breakdown, it is not neces­ flexible pavements based on serviceability criteria
11-14 Design o f Pavement Structures

Roadbed
Soil Relative
Month Modulus, Damage,
M r (psi)
uf

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

Ju ly

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Summation: S u f =

Average: -

Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus, MR (psi) = (corresponds to u^

Figure 2.3. C h art for Estim ating Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient M odulus for Flexible Pavements
Designed Using the Serviceability C riteria
Design Requirements 11-15

Roadbed
Soil Relative
Month Modulus Damage,
M_ (psi)
H uf

20,000 0 01
Jan

20,000 0 01
Feb

2,500 1 51
Mar
-

4,000 0 51
Apr

4,000 0 51
May

7 000 0 13
June

7,000 0 13
July

7,000 0 13
Aug

7 000 0 13
Sept

7 000 0 13
Oct

4 000 0 51
Nov

20,000 0 01
Dec

Summation 2u ^ = 3 72

Average u< = uf = 3 72 = 0 31
n 12

Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus, M R (psi) = 5,000 (corresponds to uf)

Figure 2.4. C h art for Estim ating Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient M odulus for Flexible Pavements
Designed Using the Serviceability C riteria
11-16 Design of Pavement Structures

2.3.2 Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction The procedure for estimating the resilient modulus
of a particular pavement material depends on its type
Like the effective roadbed soil resilient modulus Relatively low stiffness materials, such as natural
for flexible pavement design, an effective modulus of soils, unbound granular layers, and even stabilized
subgrade reaction (k-value) will be developed for rigid layers and asphalt concrete, should be tested using the
pavement design Since the k-value is directly propor­ resilient modulus test methods (AASHTO T 274) Al­
tional to roadbed soil resilient modulus, the season though the testing apparatus for each of these types of
lengths and seasonal moduli developed in the previous materials is basically the same, there are some differ­
section will be used as input to the estimation of an ences, such as the need for triaxial confinement for
effective design k-value But, because of the effects unbound materials
of subbase characteristics on the effective design Alternatively, the bound or higher stiffness materi­
k-value, its determination is included as a step in an als, such as stabilized bases and asphalt concrete, may
iterative design procedure (See Part II, Chapter 3 ) be tested using the repeated-load indirect tensile test
The development of the actual procedure for generat­ (ASTM D 4123) This test still relies on the use of
ing this effective modulus of subgrade reaction is pre­ electronic gauges to measure small movements of the
sented in Appendix HH of Volume 2 of this Guide sample under load, but is less complex and easier to
run than the triaxial resilient modulus test
Because of the small displacements and brittle
nature of the stiffest pavement materials, i e , port­
2.3.3 Pavement Layer Materials land cement concrete and those base materials stabi­
Characterization lized with a high cement content, it is difficult to
measure the modulus using the indirect tensile appa-'
Although there are many types of material proper­ ratus Thus, it is recommended that the elastic modu­
ties and laboratory test procedures for assessing the lus of such high-stiffness materials be determined
strength of pavement structural materials, one has according to the procedure described in ASTM C 469
been adopted as a basis for design in this Guide If, The elastic modulus for any type of material may
however, the user should have a better understanding also be estimated using correlations developed by the
of the “ layer coefficients” (see Section 2 3 5) that state’s department of transportation or by some other
have traditionally been used in the original AASHTO reputable agency The following is a correlation rec­
flexible pavement design procedure, it is not essential ommended by the American Concrete Institute (4) for
that the elastic moduli of these materials be character­ normal weight portland cement concrete
ized In general, layer coefficients derived from test
roads or satellite sections are preferred
Ec = 57,000(fc)°5
Elastic modulus is a fundamental engineering prop­
erty of any paving or roadbed material For those ma­
terial types which are subject to significant permanent where
deformation under load, this property may not reflect
the material’s behavior under load Thus, resilient Ec = PCC elastic modulus (in psi), and
modulus refers to the material’s stress-strain behavior f ' = PCC compressive strength (in psi) as
under normal pavement loading conditions The determined using AASHTO T 22, T 140,
strength of the material is important in addition to or ASTM C 39
stiffness, and future mechanistic-based procedures
may reflect strength as well as stiffness in the materi­
als characterization procedures In addition, stabi­ 2.3.4 PCC Modulus of Rupture
lized base materials may be subject to cracking under
certain conditions and the stiffness may not be an indi­ The modulus of rupture (flexural strength) of port­
cator for this distress type It is important to note, land cement concrete is required only for the design of
that, although resilient modulus can apply to any type a rigid pavement The modulus of rupture required by
of material, the notation MR as used in this Guide the design procedure is the mean value determined
applies only to the roadbed soil Different notations after 28 days using third-point loading (AASHTO
are used to express the moduli for subbase (ESB), base T 97, ASTM C 78) If standard agency practice dic­
(Ebs), asphalt concrete (EAC), and portland cement tates the use of center-point loading, then a correlation
concrete (Ec ) should be made between the two tests
Design Requirements 11-17

Because of the treatment of reliability in this Although the elastic (resilient) modulus has been
Guide, it is strongly recommended that the normal adopted as the standard material quality measure, it is
construction specification for modulus of rupture still necessary to identify (corresponding) layer coeffi­
(flexural strength) not be used as input, since it repre­ cients because of their treatment in the structural num­
sents a value below which only a small percent of the ber design approach Though there are correlations
distribution may lie If it is desirable to use the con­ available to determine the modulus from tests such as
struction specification, then some adjustment should the R-value, the procedure recommended is direct
be applied, based on the standard deviation of modu­ measurement using AASHTO Method T 274 (subbase
lus of rupture and the percent (PS) of the strength and unbound granular materials) and ASTM D 4123
distribution that normally falls below the specifi­ for asphalt concrete and other stabilized materials
cation: Research and field studies indicate many factors influ­
ence the layer coefficients, thus the agency’s experi­
S[.(mean) = Sc + z(SDs) ence must be included in implementing the results
from the procedures presented For example, the layer
coefficient may vary with thickness, underlying sup­
where
port, position in the pavement structure, etc
Sc = estimated mean value for PCC modulus It should be noted that laboratory resilient modulus
of rupture (psi), values can be obtained that are significantly different
Sc = construction specification on concrete from what may exist for an in situ condition For
modulus of rupture (psi), example, the presence of a very stiff unbound layer
SDs = estimated standard deviation of concrete over a low stiffness layer may result in decompaction
modulus of rupture (psi), and and a corresponding reduction of stiffness As a
z = standard normal variate: guideline for successive layers of unbound materials,
= 0 841, for PS = 20 percent,* the ratio of resilient modulus of the upper layer to that
= 1 037, for PS = 15 percent, of the lower layer should not exceed values that result
= 1 282, for PS = 10 percent, in tensile stresses in unbound granular layers
= 1 645, for PS = 5 percent, and The discussion of how these coefficients are esti­
= 2 327, for PS = 1 percent mated is separated into five categories, depending on
the type and function of the layer material These are
* N ote Permissible number of specimens, ex­ asphalt concrete, granular base, granular subbase,
pressed as a percentage, that may have strengths less cement-treated, and bituminous base Other materials
than the specification value such as lime, lime flyash, and cement flyash are ac­
ceptable materials, and each agency should develop
charts
2.3.5 Layer Coefficients

This section describes a method for estimating the Asphalt Concrete Surface Course. Figure 2 5
AASHTO structural layer coefficients (a, values) provides a chart that may be used to estimate the struc­
required for standard flexible pavement structural de­ tural layer coefficient of a dense-graded asphalt con­
sign A value for this coefficient is assigned to each crete surface course based on its elastic (resilient)
layer material in the pavement structure in order to modulus (Eac) at 68 °F Caution is recommended for
convert actual layer thicknesses into structural number modulus values above 450,000 psi Although higher
(SN) This layer coefficient expresses the empirical modulus asphalt concretes are stiffer and more resist­
relationship between SN and thickness and is a mea­ ant to bending, they are also more susceptible to
sure of the relative ability of the material to function thermal and fatigue cracking
as a structural component of the pavement The fol­
lowing general equation for structural number reflects Granular Base Layers Figure 2 6 provides a
the relative impact of the layer coefficients (a;) and chart that may be used to estimate a structural layer
thickness (D,) coefficient, a2, from one of four different laboratory
test results on a granular base material, including base
SN = 2 ajDj resilient modulus, EBS The AASHO Road Test basis
i= l for these correlations is
11-18 Design o f Pavement Structures

Structural Layer Coefficient, a,, for

Asphalt Concrete Surface Course

0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000

Elastic Modulus, EAC (psi), of

Asphalt Concrete (at 68°F)

Figure 2,5. Chart for Estimating Structural Layer Coefficient of Dense-Graded Asphalt Concrete
Based on the Elastic (Resilient) Modulus (3)
Design Requirements 11-19

0 20 -

0 18
to
40 -
0 16

--
0 14 — 100 ‘ 85 -- 2 0 10'

1000 psi
c/>
70 80 - a

Modulus - 1000
60 H
0 12
12 -
c !5 -
S? 50
o m
Rvalue

40 70 - D 2 5 -
a:
CBR

0 10 o CD - C D ------------
!0"~
20
o ~30
H 60 -
0 08 -
H 5 3 5 - 10
(J CD
3 20
X
<1>
- 5 -
15
c/5
0 06 50 —
40 -

0 04

0 02 -

0 - 4-

(1) Scale derived by averaging correlations obtained from Illinois

(2) Scale derived by averaging correlations obtained from California, N e w Mexico and W y o m i n g
(3) Scale derived by averaging correlations obtained from Texas
(4) Scale derived on N C H R P project (3)

Figure 2.6. Variation in Granular Base Layer Coefficient (a2) with Various Base Strength
Parameters (3)
11-20 Design o f Pavement Structures

a2 = 0 14 Roadbed Soil
ri 4. rri.• . Resilient Modulus (psi)
E bs = 30,000 psi Concrete Thickness ----------------------------- _—
(inches) 3,000 7,500 15,000
CBR = 100 (approx )
Less than 2 20 25 30
R-value = 85 (approx )
2-4 10 15 20
4-6 5 10 15
The following relationship may be used in lieu of Greater than 6 5 5 5
Figure 2 6 to estimate the layer coefficient, a2, for a
granular base material from its elastic (resilient) mod­
ulus, E bs (5)
For intermediate values of roadbed soil resilient mod­
a2 = 0 249(log10EBS) - 0 977 ulus, interpolation can be used
Each agency is encouraged to develop relationships
for their specific base materials (e g , MR = lqGkj)
For aggregate base layers, EBS is a function of the using AASHTO Method T 274; however, in the ab­
stress state (0) within the layer and is normally given sence of this data, values given in Table 2 3 can be
by the relation used

EBS — k]0k2 Granular Subbase Layers. Figure 2 7 provides a

chart that may be used to estimate a structural layer
coefficient, a3, from one of four different laboratory
where results on a granular subbase material, including sub­
base resilient modulus, ESB The AASHO Road Test
0 = stress state or sum of principal stresses basis for these correlations is
Oi + o 2 + o 3 (psi), and
kj, k2 = regression constants which are a
function of material type a3 = 0 11

Typical values for base materials are: E sb = 15,000 psi

CBR = 30 (approx )
kj = 3,000 to 8,000
k2 = 0 5 to 0 7 R-value = 60 (approx )

At the AASHO Road Test, modulus values (EBS in psi)

for the base were as follows:
Table 2.3. Typical Values for k ( and k2 for
Unbound Base and Subbase
Materials (MR = k,0k2)
„, . A Stress State (psi)
Moisture _------------------------- -------------- Moisture
State Equation 0 = 5 0 = 10 0 = 20 0 = 30 Condition kt* k2*
Dry 8 , 0000 ° 6 21,012 31,848 48,273 61,569 (a) Base
Damp 4,0000° 6 10,506 15,924 24,136 30,784
Wet 3,2000° 6 8,404 12,739 19,309 24,627 Dry 6,000-10,000 0 5-0 7
Damp 4,000-6,000 0 5 -0 7
Wet 2,000-4,000 0 5 -0 7
(b) Subbase
Note, Ebs is a function of not only moisture but also
Dry 6,000-8,000 0 4 -0 6
the stress state (0) Values for the stress state within
Damp 4,000-6,000 0 4 -0 6
the base course vary with the subgrade modulus and
Wet 1,500-4,000 0 4 -0 6
thickness of the surface layer Typical values for use in
design are * Range in k, and k2 is a function of the material quality
Design Requirements 11-21

0 20 -

0 1 4 - 1 - ---------- 1 00 - 90

Modulus - 1000 psi

20
70
80
50
0 12 40 70
-
CC
a) 3-
_2
CO 15
30 H CJ 60 >
0 10- <1) _14_
O 20"
o ’ 13
50 12
n 11
0 0 8 -I 10
10
40
co
0 06
30
5 -
25 5-

(T -
(1) Scale derived from correlations from Illinois
(2 ) Scale derived from correlations obtained from The Asphalt Institute, California, N e w
Mexico and W y o m i n g
(3) Scale derived from correlations obtained from Texas
(4) Scale derived On N C H R P project (3)

Figure 2.7. Variation in Granular Subbase Layer Coefficient (a3) with Various Subbase Strength
Parameters (3)
11-22 Design o f Pavement Structures

The E sb versus a2 relationship (5) similar to that 2.4 PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL

for granular base materials is as follows CHARACTERISTICS

2.4.1 Drainage
a3 = 0 227(logioESB) - 0 839
This section describes the selection of inputs to
treat the effects of certain levels of drainage on
For aggregate subbase layers, ESB is affected by predicted pavement performance Guidance is not
stress state (0) in a fashion similar to that for the base provided here for any detailed drainage designs or
layer Typical values for k! range from 1,500 to 6,000, construction methods Furthermore, criteria on the
while k2 varies from 0 4 to 0 6 Values for the ability of various drainage methods to remove mois­
AASHO Road Test subbase material were (75) ture from the pavement are not provided It is up to the
design engineer to identify what level (or quality) of
drainage is achieved under a specific set of drainage
Stress State (psi) conditions Below are the general definitions corres­
Moisture Developed
ponding to different drainage levels from the pave­
State Relationship 0 = 5 0 = 7.5 0 = 10
ment structure
Damp Mr = 5,4000°6 14,183 18,090 21,497
Wet Mr = 4,6000°6 12,082 15,410 18,312
Quality of Drainage W ater Removed W ithin
Excellent 2 hours
Good 1 day
As with the base layers, each agency is encouraged
Fair 1 week
to develop relationships for their specific materials;
Poor 1 month
however, in lieu of this data, the values in Table 2 3
Very poor (water will not drain)
can be used
Stress states (0) which can be used as a guide to
select the modulus value for subbase thicknesses be­
For comparison purposes, the drainage conditions at
tween 6 and 12 inches are as follows:
the AASHO Road Test are considered to be fair, i e ,
free water was removed within 1 week
A sphalt
Flexible Pavements. The treatment for the ex­
C oncrete Thickness Stress State
pected level of drainage for a flexible pavement is
(inches) (psi)
through the use of modified layer coefficients (e g , a
Less than 2 10 0 higher effective layer coefficient would be used for
2-4 7 5 improved drainage conditions) The factor for modify­
Greater than 4 50 ing the layer coefficient is referred to as an rrij value
and has been integrated into the structural number
(SN) equation along with layer coefficient (a;) and
thickness (Dj), thus
Cement-Treated Bases. Figure 2 8 provides a
chart that may be used to estimate the structural layer
coefficient, a2, for a cement-treated base material SN = a ^ , + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3
from either its elastic modulus, EBS, or, alternatively,
its 7-day unconfined compressive strength (ASTM (The possible effect of drainage on the asphalt
D 1633) concrete surface course is not considered ) The con­
version of the structural number into actual pavement
Bituminous-Treated Bases. Figure 2 9 presents layer thicknesses is discussed in more detail in Part II,
a chart that may be used to estimate the structural Chapter 3
layer coefficient, a2, for a bituminous-treated base Table 2 4 presents the recommended ni; values as a
material from either its elastic modulus, EBS, or, function of the quality of drainage and the percent of
alternatively, its Marshall stability (AASHTO T 245, time during the year the pavement structure would
ASTM D 1559) This is not shown in Figure 2 9 normally be exposed to moisture levels approaching
Design Requirements 11-23

28

10 0 -
26 H
1000 -

24 90 -

<Z 80 -
.C

0 20 - -

600 - / u
18 -

(A
a
16 c
<u 400 60
u U i
C
14 TE CD
o
(J 3
*o
o
200 - -

0 12 o 50 -
Cr>
0 10
O
•c
Q
C)
c
o
o
c
D

11) Scale derived by averaging correlations from Illinois Louisiana and Texas
(2) Scale derived on N C H R P project (3>

Figure 2.8. Variation in a for Cement-Treated Bases with Base Strength Parameter (3)
11-24 Design o f Pavement Structures

1800 - 4 0

0 30 1600 - '

1400 30

2 5 -
1200

1000
20 -

800_ -
0 20
15 -
600
c in
a
<D
400
<D
O ■Q
O ro
15
u CO 3
D •a
200 10 o

CO
0 10

{1) Scale derived by correlatitpn obtained from Illinois

(2) Scale derived on N C H R P project (3)

Figure 2.9. Variation in a2 for Bituminous-Treated Bases with Base Strength Parameter (3)
Design Requirements 11-25

Table 2.4. Recommended m; Values for Modifying Structural Layer Coefficients

of Untreated Base and Subbase Materials in Flexible Pavements
Percent of Time Pavement Structure is Exposed
to Moisture Levels Approaching Saturation
Quality of Less Than Greater Than
Drainage 1% 1-5% 5-25% 25%
Excellent 1 40-1 35 1 35-1 30 1 30-1 20 1 20
Good 1 35-1 25 1 25-1 15 1 15-1 00 1 00
Fair 1 25-1 15 1 15-1 05 1 00-0 80 0 80
Poor 1 15-1 05 1 05-0 80 0 80-0 60 0 60
Very poor 1 05-0 95 0 95-0 75 0 75-0 40 0 40

saturation Obviously, the latter is dependent on the load across discontinuities, such as joints or cracks
average yearly rainfall and the prevailing drainage Load transfer devices, aggregate interlock, and the
conditions As a basis for comparison, the ms value for presence of tied concrete shoulders all have an effect
conditions at the AASHO Road Test is 1 0, regardless on this value Generally, the J-value for a given set of
of the type of material A discussion of how these conditions (e g , jointed concrete pavement with tied
recommended nij values were derived is presented in shoulders) increases as traffic loads increase since ag­
Appendix DD of Volume 2 gregate load transfer decreases with load repetitions
Finally, it is also important to note that these values Table 2 6 establishes ranges of load transfer coeffi­
apply only to the effects of drainage on untreated cients for different conditions developed from experi­
base and subbase layers Although improved drain­ ence and mechanistic stress analysis As a general
age is certainly beneficial to stabilized or treated guide for the range of J-values, higher J ’s should be
materials, the effects on performance of flexible pave­ used with low k-values, high thermal coefficients, and
ments are not as profound as those quantified in large variations of temperature (The development of
Table 2 4 the J-factor terms is provided in Appendix KK of Vol­
ume 2 ) Each agency should, however, develop crite­
Rigid Pavements. The treatment for the expected ria for their own aggregates, climatic conditions, etc
level of drainage for a rigid pavement is through the If dowels are used, the size and spacing should be
use of a drainage coefficient, Cd, in the performance determined by the local agency’s procedures and/or
equation (It has an effect similar to that of the load experience As a general guideline, the dowel diame­
transfer coefficient, J ) As a basis for comparison, the ter should be equal to the slab thickness multiplied by
value for Cd for conditions at the AASHO Road Test is Vs inch (e g , for a 10-inch pavement, the diameter is
10 1XU inch The dowel spacing and length are normally
Table 2 5 provides the recommended Cd values, 12 inches and 18 inches, respectively
depending on the quality of drainage and the percent
of time during the year the pavement structure would Jointed Pavements. The value of J recommended
normally be exposed to moisture levels approaching for a plain jointed pavement (JCP) or jointed rein­
saturation As before, the latter is dependent on the forced concrete pavement (JRCP) with some type of
average yearly rainfall and the prevailing drainage load transfer device (such as dowel bars) at the joints
conditions A discussion of how these recommended is 3 2 (“protected corner” condition at the AASHO
Cd values were derived is also presented in Appendix Road Test) This value is indicative of the load transfer
DD of Volume 2 of jointed pavements without tied concrete shoulders
For jointed pavements without load transfer devices
2.4.2 Load Transfer at the joints, a J-value of 3 8 to 4 4 is recommended
(This basically accounts for the higher bending
The load transfer coefficient, J, is a factor used in stresses that develop in undowelled pavements, but
rigid pavement design to account for the ability of a also includes some consideration of the increased po­
concrete pavement structure to transfer (distribute) tential for faulting ) If the concrete has a high thermal
11-26 Design o f Pavement Structures

liable 2.5. Recommended Values of Drainage Coefficient, Cd, for Rigid

Pavement Design
Percent of Time Pavement Structure is Exposed
to Moisture Levels Approaching Saturation
Quality of Less Than Greater Than
Drainage 1% 1-5% 5-25% 25%
Excellent 1 25-1 20 120-1 15 1 15-1 10 1 10
Good 120-1 15 1 15-1 10 1 10-1 00 1 00
Fair 1 15-1 10 1 10-1 00 1 00-0 90 0 90
Poor 1 10-1 00 100-0 90 0 90-0 80 0 80
Very poor 1 00-0 90 0 90-0 80 0 80-0 70 0 70

coefficient, then the value of J should be increased stress and increased service life they provide To ac­
On the other hand, if few heavy trucks are anticipated count for this, significantly lower J-values may be
such as a low-volume road, the J-value may be low­ used for the design of both jointed and continuous
ered since the loss of aggregate interlock will be less pavements
Part I of this Guide provides some other general crite­ For continuously reinforced concrete pavements
ria for the consideration and/or design of expansion with tied concrete shoulders (the minimum bar size
joints, contraction joints, longitudinal joints, load and maximum tie bar spacing should be the same as
transfer devices, and tie bars in jointed pavements that for tie bars between lanes), the range of J is be­
tween 2 3 and 2 9, with a recommended value of 2 6
Continuously Reinforced Pavements. The value This value is considerably lower than that for the de­
of J recommended for continuously reinforced con­ sign of concrete pavements without tied shoulders be­
crete pavements (CRCP) without tied concrete cause of the significantly increased load distribution
shoulders is between 2 9 to 3 2, depending on the capability of concrete pavements with tied shoulders
capability of aggregate interlock (at future transverse For jointed concrete pavements with dowels and
cracks) to transfer load In the past, a commonly used tied shoulders, the value of J should be between 2 5
J-value for CRCP was 3 2, but with better design for and 3 1 based on the agency’s experience The lower
crack width control each agency should develop crite­ J-value for tied shoulders assumes traffic is not per­
ria based on local aggregates and temperature ranges mitted to run on the shoulder
N ote Experience has shown that a concrete
Tied Shoulders or Widened Outside Lanes. One shoulder of 3 feet or greater may be considered a tied
of the major advantages of using tied PCC shoulders shoulder Pavements with monolithic or tied curb and
(or widened outside lanes) is the reduction of slab gutter that provides additional stiffness and keeps

Table 2.6. Recommended Load Transfer Coefficient for Various Pavement

Types and Design Conditions
Shoulder Asphalt Tied P.C.C.
Load Transfer
Yes No Yes No
Devices
Pavement Type
1 Plain jointed and
jointed reinforced 32 3 8-4 4 2 5-3 1 3 6-4 2
2 CRCP 2 9-3 2 N/A 2 3-2 9 N/A
Design Requirements 11-27

traffic away from the edge may be treated as a tied may be considered Each agency’s experience in this
shoulder area should, however, be the key element in the selec­
tion of an appropriate LS value Examination of the
effect of LS on reducing the effective k-value of the
2.4.3 Loss of Support roadbed soil (see Figure 3 6) may also be helpful in
selecting an appropriate value
This factor, LS, is included in the design of rigid
pavements to account for the potential loss of support
arising from subbase erosion and/or differential verti­ 2.5 REINFORCEMENT VARIABLES
cal soil movements It is treated in the actual design
procedure (discussed in Part II, Chapter 3) by dimin­ Because of the difference in the reinforcement de­
ishing the effective or composite k-value based on the sign procedures between jointed and continuous pave­
size of the void that may develop beneath the slab ments, the design requirements for each are separated
Table 2 7 provides some suggested ranges of LS de­ into two sections Information is also provided here
pending on the type of material (specifically its stiff­ for the design of prestressed concrete pavement In
ness or elastic modulus) Obviously, if various types addition to dimensions, consideration should be given
of base or subbase are to be considered for design, to corrosion resistance of reinforcement, especially in
then the corresponding values of LS should be deter­ areas where pavements are exposed to variable mois­
mined for each type A discussion of how the loss of ture contents and salt applications
support factor was derived is present in Appendix LL
of Volume 2 of this Guide
The LS factor should also be considered in terms of 2.5.1 Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavements
differential vertical soil movements that may result in
voids beneath the pavement Thus, even though a non- There are two types of rigid pavement which fall
erosive subbase is used, a void may still develop, thus under the “jointed” category: plain jointed pavement
reducing pavement life Generally, for active swelling (JCP), which is designed not to have steel reinforce­
clays or excessive frost heave, LS values of 2 0 to 3 0 ment, and jointed reinforced concrete pavement
(JRCP), which is designed to have significant steel
reinforcement, in terms of either steel bars or welded
steel mats The steel reinforcement is added if the
Table 2.7. Typical Ranges of Loss of Support probability of transverse cracking during pavement
(LS) Factors for Various Types of life is high due to such factors as soil movement
Materials (6) and/or temperature/moisture change stresses
Loss of For the case of plain jointed concrete pavements
Support (JCP), the joint spacing should be selected at values so
Type of M aterial (LS) that temperature and moisture change stresses do not
produce intermediate cracking between joints The
Cement Treated Granular Base maximum joint spacing will vary, depending on local
(E = 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 psi) 0 0 to 1 0 conditions, subbase types, coarse aggregate types,
Cement Aggregate Mixtures etc In addition, the maximum joint spacing may be
(E = 500,000 to 1,000,000 psi) 0 0 to 1 0 selected to minimize joint movement and, conse­
Asphalt Treated Base quently, maximize load transfer Each agency’s expe­
(E = 350,000 to 1,000,000 psi) 0 0 to 1 0 rience should be relied on for this selection
Bituminous Stabilized Mixtures Following are the criteria needed for the design of
(E = 40,000 to 300,000 psi) 0 0 to 1 0 jointed pavements which are steel reinforced (JRCP)
Lime Stabilized These criteria apply to the design of both longitudinal
(E = 20,000 to 70,000 psi) 1 0 to 3 0 and transverse steel reinforcement
Unbound Granular Materials
(E = 15,000 to 45,000 psi) 1 0 to 3 0 Slab Length. This refers to the joint spacing or
Fine Grained or Natural Subgrade Materials distance, L (feet), between free (i e , untied) trans­
(E = 3,000 to 40,000 psi) 2 0 to 3 0 verse joints It is an important design consideration
N o t e : E in t h is t a b le r e f e r s t o t h e g e n e r a l s y m b o l f o r e la s t ic since it has a large impact on the maximum concrete
o r r e s ilie n t m o d u lu s o f t h e m a t e r ia l tensile stresses and, consequently, the amount of steel
11-28 Design o f Pavement Structures

reinforcement required Because of this effect, slab reinforcement may be either reinforcing bars or de­
length (joint spacing) is an important factor that must formed wire fabric It is the restraint of the concrete
be considered in the design of any reinforced or un­ due to the steel reinforcement and subbase friction
reinforced jointed concrete pavement The selection of which causes the concrete to fracture A balance be­
an appropriate value is covered in more detail in Part tween the properties of the concrete and the reinforce­
II, Chapter 3 ment must be achieved for the pavement to perform
satisfactorily The evaluation of this interaction forms
Steel Working Stress. This refers to the allowable the basis for longitudinal reinforcement design
working stress, fs (psi), in the steel reinforcement The purpose of transverse reinforcement in a CRC
Typically, a value equivalent to 75 percent of the steel pavement is to control the width of any longitudinal
yield strength is used for working stress For Grade 40 cracks which may form Transverse reinforcement
and Grade 60 steel, the allowable working stresses are may not be required for CRC pavements in which no
30,000 and 45,000 psi, respectively For Welded Wire longitudinal cracking is likely to occur based on ob­
Fabric (WWF) and Deformed Wire Fabric (DWF), the served experience of concrete pavements with same
steel yield strength is 65,000 psi and the allowable soils, aggregate types, etc However, if longitudinal
working stress is 48,750 psi The minimum wire size cracking does occur, transverse reinforcement will
should be adequate so that potential corrosion does restrain lateral movement and minimize the deleteri­
not have a significant impact on the cross-sectional ous effects of a free edge Transverse reinforcement
area should be designed based on the same criteria and
methodology used for jointed pavements
Friction Factor. This factor, F, represents the The following are the requirements for the design
frictional resistance between the bottom of the slab of longitudinal steel reinforcement in CRC pavements
and the top of the underlying subbase or subgrade
layer and is basically equivalent to a coefficient of Concrete Tensile Strength. Two measures of
friction Recommended values for natural subgrade concrete tensile strength are used in separate sections
and a variety of subbase materials are presented in of this design procedure The modulus of rupture (or
Table 2 8 flexural strength) derived from a flexural beam test
(with third point loading) is used for determination of
the required slab thickness (see Section 2 3 4) Steel
2.5.2 Continuously Reinforced reinforcement design is based on the tensile strength
Concrete Pavements derived from the indirect tensile test which is covered
under AASHTO T 198 and ASTM C 496 test specifi­
The principal reinforcement in continuously rein­ cations The strength at 28 days should be used for
forced concrete pavements (CRCP) is the longitudinal both of these values Also, these two strengths should
steel which is essentially “ continuous” throughout the be consistent with each other For this design proce­
length of the pavement This longitudinal reinforce­ dure, the indirect tensile strength will normally be
ment is used to control cracks which form in the about 86 percent of concrete modulus of rupture
pavement due to volume change in the concrete The
Concrete Shrinkage. Drying shrinkage in the
concrete from water loss is a significant factor in the
reinforcement design Other factors affecting shrink­
Thble 2.8. Recom m ended Friction Factors (7)
age include cement content, chemical admixtures,
Type of M aterial Friction Factor curing method, aggregates, and curing conditions
B eneath Slab (F) The value of shrinkage at 28 days is used for the de­
sign shrinkage value
Surface treatment 22
Both shrinkage and strength of the concrete are
Lime stabilization 18
strongly dependent upon the water-cement ratio As
Asphalt stabilization 18
more water is added to a mix, the potential for shrink­
Cement stabilization 18
age will increase and the strength will decrease Since
River gravel 15
shrinkage can be considered inversely proportional to
Crushed stone 15
strength, Table 2 9 may be used as a guide in selecting
Sandstone 12
a value corresponding to the indirect tensile strength
Natural subgrade 09
determined in Section 2 5 2
Design Requirements 11-29

Table 2.9. Approximate Relationship Between quirements and to control crack widths The design
Shrinkage and Indirect Tensile nomographs for reinforcement limit the bar selection
Strength of Portland Cement to a range of No 4 to No 7 The nominal diameter of a
Concrete (6 ) reinforcing bar, in inches, is simply the bar number
divided by 8 The wire diameter should be large
Indirect Tensile Strength Shrinkage
enough so that possible corrosion will not signifi­
(psi) (in./in.)
cantly reduce the cross section diameter Also, the
300 (or less) 0 0008 relationship between longitudinal and transverse wire
400 0 0006 should conform to manufacturers’ recommendations
500 0 00045
600 0 0003 Steel Thermal Coefficient. Unless specific
700 (or greater) 0 0002 knowledge of the thermal coefficient of the reinforcing
steel is known, a value of 5 0 X 10~6 in /in /°F may
be assumed for design purposes

Concrete Thermal Coefficient. The thermal co­ Design Temperature Drop. The temperature
efficient of expansion for portland cement concrete drop used in the reinforcement design is the difference
varies with such factors as water-cement ratio, con­ between the average concrete curing temperature and
crete age, richness of the mix, relative humidity, and a design minimum temperature The average concrete
the type of aggregate in the mix In fact, the type of curing temperature may be taken as the average daily
coarse aggregate exerts the most significant influence high temperature during the month the pavement is
Recommended values of PCC thermal coefficient (as a expected to be constructed This average accounts for
function of aggregate type) are presented in Table the heat of hydration The design minimum tempera­
2 10 ture is defined here as the average daily low tempera­
ture for the coldest month during the pavement life If
Bar or Wire Diameter. Typically, No 5 and No not available, the needed temperature data may be
6 deformed bars are used for longitudinal reinforce­ obtained from U S Government weather records The
ment in CRCP The No 6 bar is the largest practical design temperature drop which is entered in the longi­
size that should be used in CRCP to meet bond re- tudinal reinforcement design procedure is:

DT d = T h - T l
Table 2.10. Recommended Value of the
Thermal Coefficient of PCC as a
where
Function of Aggregate Types (S)
Concrete Thermal DT d = design temperature drop, °F,
Type of Coarse Coefficient T h = average daily high temperature during
Aggregate (10_6/°F) the month the pavement is constructed,
°F, and
Quartz 66
T l = average daily low temperature during the
Sandstone 6 5
coldest month of the year, °F
Gravel 60
Granite 5 3
Friction Factor. The criteria for the selection of a
Basalt 4 8
slab-base friction factor for CRC pavements is the
Limestone 3 8
same as that for jointed pavements (see Section 2 5 1)
 CHAPTER 3
HIGHWAY PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL DESIGN

This chapter describes the application of design Finally, it is strongly recommended that the life­
procedures for both flexible and rigid highway pave­ cycle cost economic analysis method described in Part
ments Flexible pavement design includes asphalt I be used as a basis to compare the alternate pavement
concrete (AC) surfaces and surface treatments (ST) designs generated by this design chart procedure for a
Rigid pavement design includes plain jointed (JCP), given pavement type Because of certain fundamental
jointed reinforced (JRCP), and continuously rein­ differences between flexible and rigid pavements and
forced (CRCP) concrete pavements General criteria the potential difference in relative costs, it is recom­
are also provided for the design of prestressed con­ mended that this life-cycle economic analysis be a
crete pavements (PCP) Pavements designed using factor, but not be the sole criteria for pavement type
these procedures are expected to carry significant lev­ selection
els of traffic and require a paved surface
With the exception of prestressed concrete pave­
ments, the design procedures in this chapter are based 3.1 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN
on the original AASHTO pavement performance
equations, which have been modified to include de­ This section describes the design for both asphalt
sign factors not considered in the previous Interim concrete (AC) pavements and surface treatments (ST)
Design Guide The design process relies exclusively which carry significant levels of traffic (i e , greater
on the design requirements developed in Part II, than 50,000 18-kip ESAL) over the performance per­
Chapter 2 and a series of nomographs which solve the iod For both the AC and ST surface types, the design
design equations It should be noted that because of is based on identifying a flexible pavement structural
the additional complexity, computer-based design number (SN) to withstand the projected level of axle
procedures for both rigid and flexible pavements need load traffic It is up to the designer to determine
to be treated in separate design manuals It should also whether a single or double ST or a paved AC surface is
be noted that the design chart procedures presented required for the specific conditions An example of
here do have some inherent assumptions and simplifi­ the application of the flexible pavement design proce­
cations which, in some cases, make their solution dure is presented in Appendix H
somewhat less precise than that provided by the cor­
responding computer solution
The design approaches for both flexible and rigid
3.1.1 Determine Required Structural Number
pavements permit both traffic and environmental loss
of serviceability to be taken into account If the de­
Figure 3 1 presents the nomograph recommended
signer desires that only the serviceability loss due to
for determining the design structural number (SN) re­
traffic be considered, then Sections 3 1 3 and 3 2 4
quired for specific conditions, including
may be ignored
The basic concept of design for both flexible and (1) the estimated future traffic, W 18 (Section
rigid pavements is to first determine the required 2 1 2 ), for the performance period,
thickness based on the level of traffic The associated (2) the reliability, R (Section 2 1 3 ), which
performance period is then corrected for any environ­ assumes all input is at average value,
mental-associated losses of serviceability A stage (3) the overall standard deviation, S0 (Section
construction option is provided to allow the designer 2 1 3),
to consider planned rehabilitation for either environ­ (4) the effective resilient modulus of roadbed
mental or economic reasons Thus, numerous strate­ material, MR (Section 2 3 1), and
gies for original design thickness and subsequent (5) the design serviceability loss, APSI = p0 —
rehabilitation may be developed p, (Section 2 2 1)

11-31
11-32 Design o f Pavement Structures
<0
E
9
Design Chart for Flexible Pavements Based on Using Mean Values for Each Input

2
2o
3
w
C/>
c
o»
«4A
)
o
00
I
sf*
©
f
g
(N
+
o\ o
rH
in nos peqpeoy oaiio0W3 m
A PSI

I (0 & z
o </>
(N in o
in
ro oo c
+ in in o
o <n
o CL«
<3 £
</) S
+
O
I
o
f
?

Figure 3.1.
VO
SOIYES:

£N
II
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-33

3.1.2 Stage Construction roadbed swelling if it reduces the availability of mois­

ture for absorption
Experience in some states has shown that regard­ Frost heave, as it is treated here, refers to the local­
less of the strength (or load-carrying capacity) of a ized volume changes that occur in the roadbed soil as
flexible pavement, there may be a maximum perform­ moisture collects, freezes into ice lenses and produces
ance period (Section 2 1 1 ) associated with a given permanent distortions in the pavement surface Like
initial structure which is subjected to some significant swelling, the effects of frost heave can be decreased by
level of truck traffic Obviously, if the analysis period providing some type of drainage system Another
(Section 2 1 1) is 20 years (or more) and this practical effective measure is to provide a layer of nonfrost-
maximum performance period is less than 20 years, susceptible material thick enough to insulate the road­
there may be a need to consider stage construction bed from frost penetration This not only protects
(i e , planned rehabilitation) in the design analysis against frost heave, but may also significantly reduce
This is especially true if life-cycle economic analyses or even eliminate the thaw-weakening that occurs in
are to be performed, where the trade-offs between the the roadbed soil during early spring
thickness designs of the initial pavement structure and If either swelling or frost heave are to be consid­
any subsequent overlays can be evaluated In such in­ ered in terms of their effects on serviceability loss and
stances, where stage construction alternatives are to the need for future overlays, then the following proce­
be considered, it is important to check the constraint dure should be applied It does require the plot of
on minimum performance period (Section 2 1 1 ) serviceability loss versus time that was developed in
within the various candidate strategies It is also im­ Section 2 1 4
portant to recognize the need to compound the relia­ The procedure for considering environmental serv­
bility for each individual stage of the strategy For iceability loss is similar to the treatment of stage con­
example, if each stage of 3-stage strategy (an initial struction strategies because of the planned future need
pavement with two overlays) has a 90-percent reliabil­ for rehabilitation In the stage construction approach,
ity, the overall reliability of the design strategy is the structural number of the initial pavement is se­
0 9 X 0 9 X 0 9 or 72 9 percent Conversely, if an lected and its corresponding performance period
overall reliability of 95 percent is desired, the individ­ (service life) determined An overlay (or series of
ual reliability for each stage must be (0 95)1/3 or 98 3 overlays) which will extend the combined perform­
percent It is important to recognize compounding of ance periods past the desired analysis period is then
reliability may be severe for stage construction, and identified The difference in the stage construction
later opportunities to correct problem areas may be approach when swelling and/or frost heave are consid­
considered ered is that an iterative process is required to deter­
To evaluate stage construction alternatives, the user mine the length of the performance period for each
should refer to Part III of this Guide which addresses stage of the strategy The objective of this iterative
pavement rehabilitation That Part provides not only a process is to determine when the combined service­
procedure for designing an overlay, but also criteria ability loss due to traffic and environment reaches the
for the application of other rehabilitation methods that terminal level It is described with the aid of Table
may be used to improve the serviceability and extend 3 1
the load-carrying capacity of the pavement The de­
sign example in Appendix H provides an illustration Step 1. Select an appropriate structural number
of the application of the stage construction approach (SN) for the initial pavement Because of the relatively
using a planned future overlay small effect the structural number has on minimizing
swelling and frost heave, the maximum initial SN rec­
ommended is that derived for conditions assuming no
swelling or frost heave For example, if the desired
3.1.3 Roadbed Swelling and Frost Heave overall reliability is 90 percent (since an overlay is
expected, the design reliability for both the initial
Roadbed swelling and/or frost heave are both im­ pavement and overlay is 0 9 m or 95 percent), the ef­
portant environmental considerations because of their fective roadbed soil modulus is 5,000 psi, the initial
potential effect on the rate of serviceability loss serviceability expected is 4 4, the design terminal
Swelling refers to the localized volume changes that serviceability is 2 5, and a 15-year performance per­
occur in expansive roadbed soils as they absorb mois­ iod (along with a corresponding 5 million 18-kip
ture A drainage system can be effective in minimizing ESAL application) for the initial pavement is as­
11-34 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 3.1. Example o f Process Used to Predict the Performance Period o f an Initial Pavement
Structure Considering Swelling and/or Frost Heave

Initial PSI 4.4

Maximum Possible Performance Period (vearsl 15

Design Serviceability Loss, APSI = Po - Pt = 44 - 2 5 = 19

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Trial Total Serviceability Corresponding Allowable Corresponding
(1) Performance Loss Due to Swelling Serviceability Loss Cumulative Performance
Iteration Period and Frost Heave Due to Traffic Traffic Period
No. (years) APSI sw.fh APSITR (18-kip ESAL) (years)
1 13.0 0 73 1 17 2 0 X 106 6 3
2 97 0 63 1 27 2 3 X 106 72
3 85 0 56 1 34 2 6 X 106 • 82
Column No. Description of Procedures
2 Estimated by the designer (Step 2)
3 Using estimated value from Column 2 with Figure 2 2, the total serviceabilityloss
due to swelling and frost heave is determined (Step 3)
4 Subtract environmental serviceability loss (Column 3) from design total
serviceability loss to determine corresponding serviceability loss due to traffic
5 Determined from Figure 3 1 keeping all inputs constant (except for use of traffic
serviceability loss from Column 4) and applying the chart in reverse (Step 5)
6 Using the traffic from Column 5, estimate net performance period from Figure 2 1
(Step 6)

sumed, the maximum structural number (determined Step 4. Subtract this environmental serviceability
from Figure 3 1) that should be considered for swell­ loss (Step 3) from the desired total serviceability loss
ing/frost heave conditions is 4 4 Anything less than a (4 4 — 2 5 = 1 9 is used in the example) to establish
SN of 4 4 may be appropriate, so long as it does not the corresponding traffic serviceability loss Enter
violate the minimum performance period (Section result in Column 4
2 1 1)
APSItr = APSI - APSIswfh
Step 2. Select a trial performance period that
might be expected under the swelling/frost heave con­
Step 5. Use Figure 3 1 to estimate the allowable
ditions anticipated and enter in Column 2 This num­
cumulative 18-kip ESAL traffic corresponding to the
ber should be less than the maximum possible
traffic serviceability loss determined in Step 4 and
performance period corresponding to the selected ini­
enter in Column 5 Note that it is important to use the
tial pavement structural number In general, the
same levels of reliability, effective roadbed soil resil­
greater the environmental loss, the smaller the per­
ient modulus, and initial structural number when ap­
formance period will be
plying the flexible pavement chart to estimate this
allowable traffic
Step 3. Using the graph of cumulative environ­
mental serviceability loss versus time developed in Step 6. Estimate the corresponding year at which
Section 2 1 4 (Figure 2 2 is used as an example), esti­ the cumulative 18-kip ESAL traffic (determined in
mate the corresponding total serviceability loss due to Step 5) will be reached and enter in Column 6 This
swelling and frost heave (APSIswfh) that can be ex­ should be accomplished with the aid of the cumulative
pected for the trial period from Step 2, and enter in traffic versus time plot developed in Section 2 1 2
Column 3 (Figure 2 1 is used as an example )
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-35

Step 7. Compare the trial performance period the layer thicknesses, it is necessary to consider their
with that calculated in Step 6 If the difference is cost effectiveness along with the construction and
greater than 1 year, calculate the average of the two maintenance constraints in order to avoid the possibil­
and use this as the trial value for the start of the next ity of producing an impractical design From a cost-
iteration (return to Step 2) If the difference is less effective view, if the ratio of costs for layer 1 to layer 2
than 1 year, convergence is reached and the average is is less than the corresponding ratio of layer coeffi­
said to be the predicted performance period of the cients times the drainage coefficient, then the opti­
initial pavement structure corresponding to the se­ mum economical design is one where the minimum
lected initial SN In the example, convergence was base thickness is used Since it is generally impracti­
reached after three iterations and the predicted per­ cal and uneconomical to place surface, base, or sub­
formance period is about 8 years base courses of less than some minimum thickness,
The basis of this iterative process is exactly the the following are provided as minimum practical
same for the estimation of the performance period of thicknesses for each pavement course
any subsequent overlays The major differences in ac­
tual application are that (1) the overlay design meth­
odology presented in Part III is used to estimate the Minimum Thickness (inches)
performance period of the overlay and (2) any swell­ A sphalt Aggregate
ing and/or frost heave losses predicted after overlay Traffic, ESAL’s C oncrete Base
should restart and then progress from the point in time
Less than 50,000 1 0 (or surface 4
when the overlay was placed
treatment)
50,001-150,000 20 4
150,001-500,000 2 5 4
3.1.4 Selection of Layer Thicknesses
500,001-2,000,000 30 6
2,000,001-7,000,000 35 6
Once the design structural number (SN) for an ini­
Greater than 7,000,000 4 0 6
tial pavement structure is determined, it is necessary
to identify a set of pavement layer thicknesses which,
when combined, will provide the load-carrying capac­
ity corresponding to the design SN The following Because such minimums depend somewhat on local
equation provides the basis for converting SN into practices and conditions, individual design agencies
actual thicknesses of surfacing, base and subbase: may find it desirable to modify the above minimum
thicknesses for their own use
Individual agencies should also establish the effec­
SN UjD| -f a2D2m2 "f- a3D3m3 tive thicknesses and layer coefficients of both single
and double surface treatments The thickness of the
where surface treatment layer may be neglectible in comput­
ing SN, but its effect on the base and subbase proper­
aj, a2, a3 = layer coefficients representative of ties may be large due to reductions in surface water
surface, base, and subbase entry
courses, respectively (see Section
2 3 5),
D 1; D2, D3 = actual thicknesses (in inches) 3.1.5 Layered Design Analysis
of surface, base, and subbase
courses, respectively, and It should be recognized that, for flexible pave­
m2, m3 = drainage coefficients for base and ments, the structure is a layered system and should be
subbase layers, respectively (see designed accordingly The structure should be de­
Section 2 4 1) signed in accordance with the principles shown in Fig­
ure 3 2. First, the structural number required over the
The SN equation does not have a single unique solu­ roadbed soil should be computed In the same way, the
tion; i e , there are many combinations of layer thick­ structural number required over the subbase layer and
nesses that are satisfactory solutions The thickness of the base layer should also be computed, using the
the flexible pavement layers should be rounded to the applicable strength values for each By working with
nearest lh inch When selecting appropriate values for differences between the computed structural numbers
11-36 Design o f Pavement Structures

SN , Surface Course r \ D,
• • • O. O • o
SN . t» Base Course o a
SN , <© <9
© © Subbase Course
£ ___• “ ** V
° J^ o - o > . c_> &> a c
Roadbed Course

SN ,
1 —

SN *, = a,D * , > SN ,

„ > SN2.SN-!
2 —
a 2 m2

SN *, + SN *2 >_ S N 2

SN 3 -(S N * , + s n *2 )
D#3 -
a3 m3

1) a, D, m and SN are as defined in the text and are minimum required values

2) A n asterisk with D or SN indicates that it represents the value actually used, which
must be equal to or greater than the required value

Figure 3.2. Procedure for Determining Thicknesses of Layers Using a Layered Analysis Approach
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-37

required over each layer, the maximum allowable modulus, the first step is to identify the combinations
thickness of any given layer can be computed For (or levels) that are to be considered and enter them in
example, the maximum allowable structural number the heading of Table 3 2
for the subbase material would be equal to the struc­
tural number required over the subbase subtracted (1) Subbase types—Different types of subbase
from the structural number required over the roadbed Have different stiengths or modulus values
soil In a like manner, the structural numbers of the The consideration of a subbase type in estimat­
other layers may be computed The thicknesses for the ing an effective k-value provides a basis for
respective layers may then be determined as indicated evaluating its cost-effectiveness as part of the
on Figure 3 2 design process
It should be recognized that this procedure should (2) Subbase thicknesses (inches)—Potential de­
not be applied to determine the SN required above sign thicknesses for each subbase type should
subbase or base materials having a modulus greater also be identified, so that its cost-effectiveness
than 40,000 psi For such cases, layer thicknesses of may be considered
materials above the “ high” modulus layer should be (3) Loss of support, LS—This factor, quantified in
established based on cost effectiveness and minimum Section 2 4 3, is used to correct the effective
practical thickness considerations k-value based on potential erosion of the sub­
base material
(4) Depth to rigid foundation (feet)—If bedrock
3.2 RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN lies within 10 feet of the surface of the sub­
grade for any significant length along the pro­
This section describes the design for portland ject, its effect on the overall k-value and the
cement concrete pavements, including plain jointed design slab thickness for that segment should
(JCP), jointed reinforced (JRCP), and continuously be considered
reinforced (CRCP) As in the design for flexible pave­
ments, it is assumed that these pavements will carry For each combination of these factors that is to be
traffic levels in excess of 50,000 18-kip ESAL over the evaluated, it is necessary to prepare a separate table
performance period An example of the application of and develop a corresponding effective modulus of sub­
this rigid pavement design procedure is presented in grade reaction
Appendix L The second step of the process is to identify the
The AASHTO design procedure is based on the seasonal roadbed soil resilient modulus values (from
AASHO Road Test pavement performance algorithm Section 2 3 1) and enter them in Column 2 of each
Inherent in the use of the procedure is the use of dow­ table As before, if the length of the smallest season is
els at transverse joints Hence, joint faulting was not a one-half month, then all seasons must be defined in
distress manifestation at the Road Test If the designer terms of consecutive half-month time intervals in the
wishes to consider nondowelled joints, he may de­ table (The same seasonal roadbed soil resilient modu­
velop an appropriate J-factor (see Section 2 4 2, lus values used for the example in Section 2 3 1 are
“ Load Transfer” ) or check his design with another used in the example presented in Table 3 3 )
agency’s procedure, such as the PCA procedure (9) The third step in estimating the effective k-value is
to assign subbase elastic (resilient) modulus (ESB)
values for each season These values, which were dis­
3.2.1 Develop Effective Modulus of cussed in Section 2 3 3, should be entered in Column
Subgrade Reaction 3 of Table 3 2 and should correspond to those for the
seasons used to develop the roadbed soil resilient
Before the design chart for determining design slab modulus values For those types of subbase material
thickness can be applied, it is necessary to estimate which are insensitive to season (e g , cement-treated
the possible levels of slab support that can be pro­ material), a constant value of subbase modulus may be
vided This is accomplished using Table 3 2 and Fig­ assigned for each season For those unbound materials
ures 3 3, 3 4, 3 5, and 3 6 to develop an effective which are sensitive to season but were not tested for
modulus of subgrade reaction, k An example of this the extreme conditions, values for ESB of 50,000 psi
process is demonstrated in Table 3 3 and 15,000 psi may be used for the frozen and spring
Since the effective k-value is dependent upon sev­ thaw periods, respectively For unbound materials,
eral different factors besides the roadbed soil resilient the ratio of the subbase to the roadbed soil resilient
11-38 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 3.2. Table for Estim ating Effective M odulus of Subgrade Reaction

T rial Subbase: T y p e _________________________ Depth to Rigid Foundation (fe e t).

Thickness (in ch es)_____________ Projected Slab Thickness (inches)
Loss of S upport, L S -----------------

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

k-Value (pci)
Roadbed Subbase Composite on Rigid Relative
M odulus, M odulus, k-Value (pci) Foundation Damage, u r
M onth M r (psi) E sb (Psi) (Fig. 3.3) (Fig. 3.4) (Fig. 3.5)

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Summation Eur =
A
Average: -n = -
£-
ur =
n
Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (pci) =
Corrected for Loss of Support k (pci) =
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-39

Example:

Dsb = 6 inches
E sb = 2 0 ,0 0 0 psi
MR - 7,000 psi
Solution: = 4 0 0 pci

1,000,000
6 0 0 ,0 0 0
4 0 0 .0 0 0
200.000
100,000
7 3 .0 0 0
5 0 .0 0 0
3 0 .0 0 0
1 5 .0 0 0

10,000
12,000
16,000
2 0,00 0

Figure 3.3. Chart for Estimating Composite Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k^,, Assuming a
Semi-Infinite Subgrade Depth. (For practical purposes, a semi-infinite depth is
considered to be greater than 10 feet below the surface of the subgrade.)
 11-40
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k,, (p c i)
Assuming Semi-infinite Subgrade Depth

Design of Pavement Structures

Figure 3.4. Chart to Modify Modulus of Subgrade Reaction to Consider Effects of Rigid Foundation Near Surface (within 10 feet)
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-41

Composite k-value (pci)

Figure 3.5. C h a rt for Estim ating Relative Damage to Rigid Pavements Based on Slab Thickness
an d Underlying Support
 11-42 Design o f Pavement Structures

5 10 50 100 500 1000 2000

Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (pci)

Figure 3.6. Correction of Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction for Potential Loss of Subbase Support (6 )
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-43

Table 3.3. Exam ple A pplication of M ethod for Estim ating Effective M odulus of Subgrade Reaction

T rial Subbase: T y p e _________Granular____________ Depth to Rigid Foundation (fe e t).

Thickness (inches)______§______ Projected Slab Thickness (inches)
Loss of S upport, LS *0

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

k-Value (pci)
Roadbed Subbase Composite on Rigid Relative
M odulus, M odulus, k-Value (pci) Foundation Damage, u r
M onth M r (psi) E sb (psi) (Fig. 3.3) (Fig. 3.4) (Fig. 3.5)
20,000 50,000 1,100 1,350 0 35
Jan

20,000 50,000 1,100 1,350 0 35

Feb

2,500 15,000 160 230 0 86

Mar

4,000 15,000 230 300 0 78

Apr

4,000 15,000 230 300 0 78

May

7,000 20,000 410 540 0 60

June

7,000 20,000 410 540 0 60

July

7,000 20,000 410 540 0 60

Aug

7,000 20,000 410 540 0 60

Sept

7,000 20,000 410 540 0 60

Oct

4,000 15,000 230 300 0 78

Nov

20,000 50,000 1,100 1,350 0 35

Dec

£u r 7 25 Summation Eur = 7 25
Average: v 0 60
n 12
Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (pci) =
Corrected for Loss of Support: k (pci) =
11-44 Design of Pavement Structures

modulus should not exceed 4 to prevent an artificial 3.2.2 Determine Required Slab Thickness
condition
The fourth step is to estimate the composite modu­ Figure 3 7 (in 2 segments) presents the nomograph
lus of subgrade reaction for each season, assuming a used for determining the slab thickness for each effec­
semi-infinite subgrade depth (i e , depth to bedrock tive k-value identified in the previous section The
designer may then select the optimum combination of
greater than 10 feet) and enter in Column 4 This is
slab and subbase thicknesses based on economics and
accomplished with the aid of Figure 3 3 Note that the
other agency policy requirements Generally, the layer
starting point in this chart is subbase thickness, DSB
thickness is rounded to the nearest inch, but the use of
If the slab is placed directly on the subgrade (i e , no controlled grade slip form pavers may permit '/2-inch
subbase), the composite modulus of subgrade reaction increments In addition to the design k-value, other
is defined using the following theoretical relationship inputs required by this rigid pavement design nomo­
between k-values from a plate bearing test and elastic graph include
modulus of the roadbed soil:
(1) the estimated future traffic, W 18 (Section
2 1 2 ), for the performance period,
k = Mr /19 4 (2) the reliability, R (Section 2 1 3),
(3) the overall standard deviation, S„ (Section
2 1 3),
N ote The development of this relationship is de­ (4) design serviceability loss, APSI — Pi — pt
scribed as part of Volume 2, Appendix HH (Section 2 2 1),
The fifth step is to develop a k-value which in­ (5) concrete elastic modulus, Ec (Section 2 3 3),
cludes the effect of a rigid foundation near the surface (6) concrete modulus of rupture, S' (Section
2 3 4),
This step should be disregarded if the depth to a rigid
(7) load transfer coefficient, J (Section 2 4 2),
foundation is greater than 10 feet Figure 3 4 provides
and
the chart that may be used to estimate this modified
(8) drainage coefficient, Cd (Section 2 4 1)
k-value for each season It considers roadbed soil re­
silient modulus and composite modulus of subgrade
reaction, as well as the depth to the rigid foundation
3.2.3 Stage Construction
The values for each modified k-value should subse­
quently be recorded in Column 5 of Table 3 2
Experience in some states has shown that there may
The sixth step in the process is to estimate the be a practical maximum performance period (Section
thickness of the slab that will be required, and then 2 1 1 ) associated with a given rigid pavement which is
use Figure 3 5 to determine the relative damage, ur, subjected to some significant level of truck traffic To
in each season and enter them in Column 6 of Ta­ consider analysis periods which are longer than this
ble 3 2 maximum expected performance period or to more
The seventh step is to add all the ur values (Column rigorously consider the life-cycle costs of rigid pave­
6) and divide the total by the number of seasonal in­ ment designs which are initially thinner, it is neces­
crements (12 or 24) to determine the average relative sary to consider the stage construction (planned
damage, ur The effective modulus of subgrade reac­ rehabilitation) approach in the design process It is
tion, then, is the value corresponding to the average also important to recognize the need to compound the
relative damage (and projected slab thickness) in Fig­ reliability for each individual stage of the strategy For
example, if both stages of a two-stage strategy (an
ure 3 5
initial PCC pavement with one overlay) have a 90-
The eighth and final step in the process is to adjust
percent reliability, the overall reliability of the design
the effective modulus of subgrade reaction to account strategy would be 0 9 X 0 9 or 81 percent Con­
for the potential loss* of support arising from subbase versely, if an overall reliability of 95 percent is
erosion Figure 3 6 provides the chart for correcting desired, the individual reliability for each stage must
the effective modulus of subgrade reaction based on be (0 95)I/2 or 97 5 percent
the loss of support factor, LS, determined in Section To evaluate secondary stages of such stage con­
2 4 3 Space is provided in Table 3 2 to record this struction alternatives, the user should refer to Part III
final design k-value of this Guide which addresses the design for pavement
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-45
8Uj*l MOJOft
< —
(0 M
If) — Id •
Design Chart for Rigid Pavement Based on Using Mean Values for Each Input Variable (Segment 1)

+ 11 2a £O I
c
•s
-* to O
cvl O I
II Ct
oe: * ID
Nl
M O
11
O
V K
II
to e
s s<L It 0
It s
. B *5
q: 0 v>
5
a —
a
-1 ? O
to
?! •<
u M TJ
Ui "to “> o
isav

Figure 3.7.
46 Design o f Pavement Structures

Figure 3.7. Continued—Design Chart for Rigid Pavements Based on Using Mean Values for
Each Input Variable (Segment 2)
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-47

rehabilitation That part not only provides a procedure formance period for each stage of the strategy The
for designing overlays, but also provides criteria for objective of this iterative process is to determine when
the application of other rehabilitation methods that the combined serviceability loss due to traffic and
may be used to improve the serviceability and extend environment reaches the terminal level This is de­
the load-carrying capacity of the pavement The de­ scribed with the aid of Table 3 4
sign example in Appendix I provides an illustration of
the application of the stage construction approach Step 1. Select an appropriate slab thickness for
using a planned future overlay the initial pavement Because of the relatively small
effect slab thickness has on minimizing swelling and
frost heave, the maximum initial thickness recom­
3.2.4 R oadbed Swelling and Frost Heave mended is that derived for conditions assuming no
swelling or frost heave Referring to the example prob­
The approach to considering the effects of swelling lem presented in Figure 3 7, the maximum feasible
and frost heave in rigid pavement design is almost slab thickness is 9 5 inches Any practical slab thick­
identical to that for flexible pavements (Section ness less than this value may be appropriate for swell­
3 1 3 ) Thus, some of the discussion is repeated here ing or frost heave conditions, so long as it does not
Roadbed swelling and frost heave are both impor­ violate the minimum performance period (Section
tant environmental considerations because of their 2 1 1)
potential effect on the rate of serviceability loss It is important to note here that for this example, an
Swelling refers to the localized volume changes that overall reliability of 90 percent is desired Since it is
occur in expansive roadbed soils as they absorb mois­ expected that one overlay will be required to reach the
ture A drainage system can be effective in minimizing 20-year analysis period, the individual reliability that
roadbed swelling if it reduces the availability of must be used for the design of both the initial pave­
moisture for absorption ment and the overlay is 0 90 V2 or 95 percent
Frost heave, as it is treated here, refers to the local­
ized volume changes that occur in the roadbed as Step 2. Select a trial performance period that
moisture collects, freezes into ice lenses, and pro­ might be expected under the swelling/frost heave
duces distortions on the pavement surface Like swell­ conditions anticipated and enter in Column 2 This
ing, the effects of frost heave can be decreased by number should be less than the maximum possible
providing some type of drainage system Perhaps a performance period corresponding to the selected
more effective measure is to provide a layer of non­ initial slab thickness In general, the greater the en­
frost-susceptible material thick enough to insulate the vironmental loss, the smaller the performance period
roadbed soil from frost penetration This not only pro­ will be
tects against frost heave, but also significantly reduces
or even eliminates the thaw-weakening that may occur Step 3. Using the graph of cumulative environ­
in the roadbed soil during early spring mental serviceability loss versus time developed in
If either swelling or frost heave is to be considered Section 2 1 4 (Figure 2 2 is used as an example),
in terms of their effects on serviceability loss and the estimate the corresponding total environmental
need for future overlays, then the following procedure serviceability loss due to swelling and frost heave
should be applied It requires the plot of serviceability (APSIswfh) that can be expected for the trial period
loss versus time developed in Section 2 1 4 from Step 2 and enter in Column 3
The procedure for considering environmental serv­
iceability loss is similar to the treatment of stage con­ Step 4. Subtract this environmental serviceability
struction strategies because of the planned future need loss (Step 3) from the desired total serviceability loss
for rehabilitation In the stage construction approach, (4.2 — 2 5 = 1 7 used in the example) to establish the
an initial PCC slab thickness is selected and the cor­ corresponding traffic serviceability loss Enter in
responding performance period (service life) deter­ Column 4
mined An overlay (or series of overlays) which will
extend the combined performance periods past the de­
A PSI tr = A PSI - A P SI sw,fh
sired analysis period is then identified. The difference
in the stage construction approach when swelling
and/or frost heave are considered is that an iterative Step 5, Use Figure 3 7 to estimate the allowable
process is required to determine the length of the per­ cumulative 18-kip ESAL traffic corresponding to the
11-48 Design of Pavement Structures

Table 3.4. Example of Process Used to Predict the Performance Period of an Initial Rigid Pavement
Structure Considering Swelling and/or Frost Heave

Slab Thickness (inches) 95

Maximum Possible Performance Period (yearsl 20
Design Serviceability Loss, APSI = Pi - Pt = -2 5 = 17
4 2 '

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Trial Total Serviceability Corresponding Allowable Corresponding
(1) Performance Loss Due to Swelling Serviceability Loss Cumulative Performance
Iteration Period and Frost Heave Due to Traffic Traffic Period
No. (years) A PSI sw.fh A PSI tr (18-kip ESAL) (years)
1 14 0 0 75 0 95 3 1 x 106 96
2 11 8 0 69 1 01 3 3 x 106 10 2
3 11 0 0 67 1 03 3 4 x 106 10 4
Column No. Description of Procedures
2 Estimated by the designer (Step 2)
3 Using estimated value from Column 2 with Figure 2 2, the total serviceabilityloss
due to swelling and frost heave is determined (Step 3)
4 Subtract environmental serviceability loss (Column 3) from design total
serviceability loss to determine corresponding serviceability loss due to traffic
5 Determined from Figure 3 5 keeping all inputs constant (except for use of traffic
serviceability loss from Column 4) and applying the chart in reverse (Step 5)
6 Using the traffic from Column 5, estimate net performance period from Figure 2 1
(Step 6)

traffic serviceability loss determined in Step 4 and The basis of this iterative process is exactly the
enter in Column 5 Note that it is important to use the same for the estimation of the performance period of
same levels of reliability, effective modulus of sub­ any subsequent overlays The major differences in ac­
grade reaction, etc , when applying the rigid pave­ tual application are that (1) the overlay design meth­
ment design chart to estimate the allowable traffic odology presented in Part III is used to estimate the
performance period of the overlay, and (2) any swell­
Step 6. Estimate the corresponding year at which ing and/or frost heave losses predicted after overlay
the cumulative 18-kip ESAL traffic (determined in should restart and then progress from the point when
Step 5) will be reached and enter in Column 6 This the overlay was placed
should be accomplished with the aid of the cumulative
traffic versus time plot developed in Section 2 1 2
(Figure 2 1 is used as an example ) 3.3 RIGID PAVEMENT JOINT DESIGN

Step 7. Compare the trial performance period This section covers the design considerations for
with that calculated in Step 6 If the difference is the different types of joints in portland cement con­
greater than 1 year, calculate the average of the two crete pavements This criteria is applicable to the de­
and use this as the trial value for the start of the next sign of joints in both jointed and continuous
iteration (return to Step 2) If the difference is less pavements
than 1 year, convergence is reached and the average
is said to be the predicted performance period of
the initial pavement structure corresponding to the 3.3.1 Joint Types
selected design slab thickness In the example, con­
vergence was reached after three iterations and the Joints are placed in concrete pavements to permit
predicted performance period is about 10 5 years expansion and contraction of the pavement, thereby
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-49

relieving stresses due to environmental changes The use of expansion joints is generally minimized
(i e , temperature and moisture), friction, and to facil­ on a project due to cost, complexity, and performance
itate construction There are three general types of problems They are used at structures where pavement
joints contraction, expansion, and construction types change (e g , CRCP to jointed), with prestressed
These joints and their functions are as follows: pavements; and at intersections
The spacing between construction joints is gener­
(1) Contraction or weakened-plane (dummy) ally dictated by field placement and equipment capa­
joints are provided to relieve the tensile bilities Longitudinal construction joints should be
stresses due to temperature, moisture, and placed at lane edges to maximize pavement smooth­
friction, thereby controlling cracking If con­ ness and minimize load transfer problems Transverse
traction joints were not installed, random construction joints occur at the end of a day’s place­
cracking would occur on the surface of the ment or in connection with equipment breakdowns
pavement
(2) The primary function of an expansion joint is Joint Layout. Skewing and randomization of
to provide space for the expansion of the pave­ joints minimize the effect of joint roughness, thereby
ment, thereby preventing the development of improving the pavement riding quality
compressive stresses, which can cause the Skewed transverse joints will improve joint per­
pavement to buckle formance and extend the life or rigid pavements, i e ,
(3) Construction joints are required to facilitate plain or reinforced, doweled, or undoweled The joint
construction The spacing between longitudi­ is skewed sufficiently so that wheel loads of each axle
nal joints is dictated by the width of the paving cross the joint one at a time The obtuse angle at the
machine and by the pavement thickness outside pavement edge should be ahead of the joint in
the direction of traffic since that corner receives the
greatest impact from the sudden application of wheel
loads Skewed joints have these advantages:
3.3.2 Joint Geom etry
(1) reduced deflection and stress at joints, thereby
The joint geometry is considered in terms of the increasing the load-carrying capacity of the
spacing and general layout slab and extending pavement life, and
(2) less impact reaction in vehicles as they cross
the joints, and hence a smoother ride if the
Joint Spacing. In general, the spacing of both
joints have some roughness
transverse and longitudinal contraction joints depends
on local conditions of materials and environment, A further refinement for improving performance of
whereas expansion and construction joints are primar­ plain pavements is to use skewed joints at randomized
ily dependent on layout and construction capabilities or irregular spacings Randomized spacing patterns
For contraction joints, the spacing to prevent interme­ prevent rhythmic or resonant responses in vehicles
diate cracking decreases as the thermal coefficient, moving at normal rural expressway speeds Research
temperature change, or subbase frictional resistance at a motor vehicle proving ground indicated that slab
increases, and the spacing increases as the concrete spacing patterns of 7 5 feet should be avoided
tensile strength increases The spacing also is related
to the slab thickness and the joint sealant capabilities Joint Dimensions. The width of the joint is con­
At the present time, the local service records are the trolled by the joint sealant extension and is covered in
best guide for establishing a joint spacing that will Section 2 4 6, “Joint Sealant Dimensions ” The depth
control cracking Local experience must be tempered of contraction joints should be adequate enough to
since a change in coarse aggregate type may have a ensure that cracking occurs at the desired location
significant impact on the concrete thermal coefficient rather than in a random pattern Normally, the depth
and consequently, the acceptable joint spacing As a of transverse contraction joints should be lU of the
rough guide, the joint spacing (in feet) for plain con­ slab thickness, and longitudinal joints lh of the thick­
crete pavements should not greatly exceed twice the ness These joints may be developed by sawing, in­
slab thickness (in inches) For example, the maximum serts, or forming Time of sawing is critical to prevent
joint spacing for an 8-inch slab is 16 feet Also, as a uncontrolled cracking, and joints should be sawed
general guideline, the ratio of slab width to length consecutively to ensure all commence working to­
should not exceed 1 25 gether The length of time from concrete placement to
11-50 Design o f Pavement Structures

saw cutting will change throughout the day as slab For design purposes, the mean transverse joint
temperatures, curing conditions, and mix proportions opening over a time interval can be computed approxi­
change mately The joint width must account for the move­
ment plus the allowable residual strain in the joint
sealant, and may be computed by the following:
3.3.3 Joint Sealant Dimensions

The joint sealant dimension guidelines are dis­ A L = CL(etc x D T d + Z) x 100

cussed for each joint type in the following sections

Contraction Joints. Joint movement and the ca­ where

pabilities of the sealant material must be optimized In
general, the quality of the joint sealant material should
AL = the joint opening caused by temperature
increase as the expected joint movement increases
changes and drying shrinkage of the
Increased joint movement can be the result of longer
slab length, higher temperature change, and/or higher PCC, in ,
concrete thermal coefficient S = allowable strain of joint sealant material
Joint movement in pavements is influenced by fac­ Most current sealants are designed to
tors such as slab length volume change characteristics withstand strains of 25 to 35 percent,
of the concrete, slab temperature range, and friction thus 25 percent may be used as a
between the slab and subbase (or subgrade) Note that conservative value,
because of subgrade friction and end restraints, a c = the thermal coefficient of contraction of
changes in joint width are less than what would be Portland cement concrete, °F,
predicted by simple thermal contraction and expan­ Z = the drying shrinkage coefficient of the
sion PCC slab, which can be neglected for a
In order to maintain an effective field-molded seal, resealing project, in /in ,
the sealant reservoir must have the proper shape factor L = joint spacing, in ,
(depth-to-width ratio) Within the practical limitations DT d = the temperature range, °F, and
of minimum joint depth, the reservoir should be as C = the adjustment factor due to subbase/slab
nearly square as possible and recessed below the sur­ friction restraint Use 0 65 for stabilized
face a minimum of Vs inch This means that a sealant subbase, 0 80 for granular base
reservoir normally must be formed by increasing the
width and reducing the depth of the top portion of the
For premolded sealants, the material and the move­
joint to hold the sealant For narrow joints with close
ment must be optimized The manufacturers generally
joint spacing, the reservoir can be formed by inserting
publish aids for selecting dimensions to suit their
a cord or other material to a predetermined depth to
product The sealant should be compressed between
define the reservoir This method minimizes the
20 to 50 percent of its nominal width The sealant
amount of joint sealant required In general, the depth
should be placed '/s to V2 inch below the surface of the
to width of sealant ratio should be within a range of
1 to IV2, with a minimum depth of 3/s and V2 inch for pavement
longitudinal and transverse joints, respectively
The joint width is defined as the maximum value Expansion Joints. The movement at expansion
that occurs at the minimum temperature Thus, the joints should be based on the agency’s experience The
maximum value includes the anticipated horizontal sealant reservoir dimensions should be optimized
movement plus residual width due to sealant proper­ based on movement and material capabilities In gen­
ties The horizontal movement can be calculated by eral, the dimensions will be much larger than for
considering the seasonal openings and closings caused contraction joints
by temperature cycles plus concrete shrinkage The
amount of opening and closing depends on tempera­
ture and moisture change, spacing between working Construction Joints. The discussion pertaining
joints or cracks, friction between the slab and base, to transverse contraction joints is also applicable to
the condition of the joint load transfer devices, etc construction and other longitudinal joints
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-51

3 .4 RIGID PAVEMENT 3.4.2 Continuously Reinforced

REINFORCEMENT DESIGN Concrete Pavements

The purpose of distributed steel reinforcement in This section is for the design of longitudinal rein­
reinforced concrete pavement is not to prevent crack­ forcing steel in continuously reinforced concrete pave­
ing, but to hold tightly closed any cracks that may ments The design procedure presented here may be
form, thus maintaining the pavement as an integral systematically performed using the worksheet in Table
structural unit The physical mechanism through 3 5 In this table, space is provided for entering the
which cracks develop is affected by (1) temperature appropriate design inputs, intermediate results and
and/or moisture-related slab contractions, and (2) calculations for determining the required longitudinal
frictional resistance from the underlying material As steel percentage A separate worksheet, presented in
temperature drops or moisture content decreases, the Table 3 6, is provided for design revisions Although
slab tends to contract This contraction is resisted by the examples use reinforcing bars, the use of deformed
the underlying material through friction and shear be­ wire fabric (DWF) is also an acceptable alternative
tween it and the slab The restraint of slab contraction The design inputs required by this procedure are as
results in tensile stresses which reach a maximum at follows
midslab If these tensile stresses exceed the tensile
(1) concrete indirect tensile strength, ft
strength of the concrete, a crack will develop and all
(Section 2 5 2),
the stresses are transferred to the steel reinforcement
(2) concrete shrinkage at 28 days, Z
Thus, the reinforcement must be designed to carry
(Section 2 5 2),
these stresses without any appreciable elongation that
(3) concrete thermal coefficient, a c
would result in excessive crack width (Section 2 5 2),
Because the longitudinal steel reinforcement re­ reinforcing bar or wire diameter, (J)/
(4)
quirements between jointed reinforced (JRCP) and (Section 2 5 2),
continuously reinforced concrete pavement (CRCP) steel thermal coefficient, a s (Section 2 5 2),
(5)
are significantly different, the reinforcement designs and
are treated separately It should be recognized, how­ design temperature drop, DT d
(6)
ever, that the design for transverse steel in CRCP is (Section 2 5 2)
exactly the same as the design for longitudinal and
transverse steel reinforcement in JRCP In all cases, These data should be recorded in the space pro­
the amount of reinforcement required is specified as a vided in the top portion of Table 3 5
percentage of the concrete cross-sectional area An additional input required by the procedure is the
wheel load tensile stress developed during initial load­
ing of the constructed pavement by either construction
equipment or truck traffic Figure 3 9 may be used to
3.4.1 Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavements estimate this wheel load stress based on the design
slab thickness, the magnitude of the wheel load, and
The nomograph for estimating the percent of steel the effective modulus of subgrade reaction This value
reinforcement required in a jointed reinforced con­ should also be recorded in the space provided in
crete pavement is presented in Figure 3 8 The inputs Table 3 5
required include
Limiting Criteria. In addition to the inputs re­
(1) slab length, L (Section 2 5 1), quired for the design of longitudinal reinforcing steel,
(2) steel working stress, fs (Section 2 5 1), and there are three limiting criteria which must be consid­
(3) friction factor, F (Section 2 5 1) ered: crack spacing, crack width, and steel stress
Acceptable limits of these are established below to
This chart applies to the design of transverse steel ensure that the pavement will respond satisfactorily
reinforcement (Section 3 3 3) in both jointed and con­
under the anticipated environmental and vehicular
tinuously reinforced concrete pavements, as well as to
loading conditions
the design of longitudinal steel reinforcement in JRCP
Normally for joint spacing, less than 15 feet trans­ (1) The limits on crack spacing are derived from
verse cracking is not anticipated; thus steel reinforce­ consideration of spalling and punchouts To
ment would not be required minimize the incidence of crack spalling, the
11-52 Design o f Pavement Structures

(fe e t)

f_ (k si)
L
Length,

Stress,
Slab

Steel Working
Exam ple:
L = 36 ft
F = 15
fs = 30,000 psi

Solution:
Ps = 085%

Figure 3.8. Reinforcement Design Chart for Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavements
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-53

Table 3.5. W orksheet for Longitudinal Reinforcem ent Design

DESIGN INPUTS
Input Variable Value Input Variable Value
Reinforcing Bar/Wire Diameter, Thermal Coefficient Ratio,
<|> (inches) a s/a c (in /in )
Concrete Shrinkage, Design Temperature Drop,
Z (in /in ) DT d (°F)
Concrete Tensile Strength, Wheel Load Stress,
ft (psi) ow (psi)

DESIGN CRITERIA AND REQUIRED STEEL PERCENTAGE

Crack Allowable Crack Allowable Steel
Spacing, x Width, CWmax Stress, (os)max
(feet) (inches) (ksi)
Max 8 0
Value of Limiting Criteria
Min 3 5
Minimum Required Steel
Percentage (Pmin)*
Maximum Allowable Steel
Percentage P
± max
♦Enter the largest percentage across line
**If Praax < Pmin, then reinforcement criteria are in conflict, design not feasible

maximum spacing between consecutive cracks on past experience, many miles of CRC pave­
should be no more than 8 feet To minimize the ments have performed satisfactorily even
potential for the development of punchouts, the though the steel stress was predicted to be
minimum desirable crack spacing that should above the yield point This led to reconsidera­
be used for design is 3 5 feet These limits are tion of this criteria and allowance for a small
already recorded in Table 3 5 amount of permanent deformation (10)
(2) The limiting criterion on crack width is based
on a consideration of spalling and water pene­ Values of allowable mean steel working stress for
tration The allowable crack width should not use in this design procedure are listed in Table 3 7 as a
exceed 0 04 inch In final determination of function of reinforcing bar size and concrete strength
the longitudinal steel percentage, the predicted The indirect tensile strength should be that determined
crack width should be reduced as much as in Section 2 5 2 The limiting steel working stresses
possible through the selection of a higher steel in Table 3 7 are for the Grade 60 steel (meeting ASTM
percentage or smaller diameter reinforcing A 615 specifications) recommended for longitudinal
bars reinforcement in CRC pavements (guidance for deter­
(3) Limiting criteria placed on steel stress are to mination of allowable steel stress for other types of
guard against steel fracture and excessive per­ steel provided in Reference 10) Once the allowable
manent deformation To guard against steel steel working stress is determined, it should be en­
fracture, a limiting stress of 75 percent of the tered in the space provided in Table 3 5
ultimate tensile strength is set The conven­
tional limit on Figure 3 9 steel stress is 75 Design Procedure. The following procedure may
percent of the yield point so that the steel does be used to determine the amount of longitudinal re­
not undergo any plastic deformation Based inforcement required
11-54 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 3.6. Worksheet for Revised Longitudinal Reinforcement Design

Change in Value from Previous Trial

Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial
Parameter 2 3 4 5 6
2Reinforcing Bar/Wire Diameter,
t() (inches)
Concrete Shrinkage,
Z (in /in )
2Concrete Tensile Strength,
ft (psi)
Wheel Load Stress,
o w (psi)
'Design Temperature Drop,
DTd (°F)
Thermal Coefficient Ratio,
a s/a c
Allowable Crack Width Criterion,
CWmax (inches)
Allowable Steel Stress Criterion,
(^s)tnax (ksi)
Required Steel % for m'n
Crack Spacing max
Minimum Required Steel %
for Crack Width
Minimum Required Steel %
for Steel Stress
Minimum % Reinforcement,
p .
Amin
Maximum % Reinforcement,
pAmax
'Change in this parameter will affect crack width criterion
2Change in this parameter will affect steel stress criterion
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-55

600

WHEEL LOAD E F F E C T IV E
\ MAGNITUDE MODULUS OF
S% (POUNDS) SUBGRADE
12 — REACTION k { pci) 550

p
:Qr

500
:Qr

(psi)
10 — 450
:or
D (inches)

tr
Wheel Load Tensile Stress,
':0,
9— 400
Design Slab Thickness,

:Qr

8— 350
:0,

7— ■of 300

6— 250
WHEEL LOAD - 20,000 lb
k = I70 pci
SOLUTION • X
0 ”w - 230 psi
5—
200

150

Figure 3.9. C h art for Estim ating W heel Load Tensile Stress
11-56 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 3.7. Allowable Steel Working Stress, Nmax = maximum required number of
ksi (10) reinforcing bars or wires,
Pmin = minimum required percent steel,
Indirect Tensile
Reinforcing Bar Size* Pmax = maximum required percent steel,
Strength of Concrete
Ws = total width of pavement section (inches),
at 28 days, psi No. 4 No. 5 No. 6
D = thickness of concrete layer (inches), and
300 (or less) 65 57 54 (p = reinforcing bar or wire diameter
400 67 60 55 (inches), which may be increased if loss
500 67 61 56 of cross section is anticipated due to
600 67 63 58 corrosion
700 67 65 59
800 (or greater) 67 67 60
Step 4. Determine the final steel design by select­
*For DWF proportional adjustments may be made using the ing the total number of reinforcing bars or wires in the
wire diameter to bar diameter final design section, NDesign, such that NDesign is a
whole integer number between Nmin and Nmax The
appropriateness of these final design alternatives may
Step 1. Solve for the required amount of steel be checked by converting the whole integer number of
reinforcement to satisfy each limiting criterion using bars or wires to percent steel and working backward
the design charts in Figures 3 10, 3 11, and 3 12 through the design charts to estimate crack spacing,
Record the resulting steel percentages in the spaces crack width, and steel stress
provided in the worksheet in Table 3 5
Design Example. The following example is pro­
Step 2. If Pmax is greater than or equal to Pmin,
vided to demonstrate the CRCP longitudinal rein­
go to Step 3 If Pmax is less than Pmin, then
forcement design procedure Two trial designs are
(1) Review the design inputs and decide which evaluated; the first considers 5/«-inch (No 5) reinforc­
input to revise ing bars and the second trial design examines 3/4-inch
(2) Indicate the revised design inputs in the work­ (No 6) bars Below are the input requirements se­
sheet in Table 3.6 Make any corresponding lected for this example These values are also recorded
change in the limiting criteria as influenced by for both of the trial designs in the example worksheets
the change in design parameter and record this presented in Tables 3 8 and 3 9
in Table 3 6 Check to see if the revised inputs
affect the subbase and slab thickness design It (1) Concrete tensile strength, ft 550 psi (This is
may be necessary to reevaluate the subbase and approximately 86 percent of the modulus of
slab thickness design rupture used in the slab thickness design exam­
(3) Rework the design nomographs and enter the ple, see Figure 3 7 )
resulting steel percentages in Table 3 6 (2) Concrete shrinkage, Z: 0 0004 in /in (This
(4) If Pmax is greater than or equal to Pmin, go to corresponds to the concrete tensile strength,
Step 3 If Pmax is less than Pmin, repeat this step see Table 2 7 )
using the space provided in Table 3 6 for addi­ (3) Wheel load stress, o w: 230 psi (This is based
tional trials on the earlier slab thickness design example,
9 5-inch slab with a modulus of subgrade reac­
Step 3. Determine the range in the number of tion equal to 170 pci; see Figure 3 9 )
reinforcing bars or wires required: (4) Ratio of steel thermal coefficient to that of
Portland Cement Concrete, a s/ a c: 1 32 (For
Nmin = 0 01273 X Prain X Ws X D/(t>/2, and steel, the thermal coefficient is 5 X 10-6 in /
in /15°F (See Section 2 5 2) Assume lime­
Nmax = 0 01273 X Pmax X Ws X D/<|>/2 stone coarse aggregate in concrete, therefore,
the thermal coefficient is 3 8 X 10 ~6 in /in /
where °F (See Table 2 9 )
(5) Design temperature drop, DTd : 55°F (As­
Nmin = minimum required number of reinforcing sume high temperature is 75 °F and low is
bars or wires, 20°F )
Highway Pavement Structural Design 77-57

Crack Sp a cin g, X (ft)

ro o* * © o> © © O — rs>
o o o o o o o b o o b

o
■o

<J>
o
©
(A

XI
II
W
tv

Ik
a>
3
♦
“0
ro
o «
X o a*
'
r: ;r ro rs> ro
© 5 ♦
o oS 2
o o© o o ® CD
o X
o
o
N +
© ©
o I o o r-
o o o -J
to
N
<o
Concrete Tensile Strength at 28 Days, f j (p si)

Percent S te e l, P____________
T T
U> M * q N ^ g XI
— it e
21 w
°? 58
° ow 2
n 1 ? *
W
fO
o
Ul

F igure 3.10. Percent of Longitudinal Reinforcem ent to Satisfy C rack Spacing C riteria
11-58 Design o f Pavement Structures

Crack W id th , CW (in)

o
3
o
<o
a
■o
ZT
to
<
CD
V>
Tensile Stress Due to Wheel Load. (TL (psi) n
f 1 T IT I I T T \T T I
oo PO a
o o o
O
CO "♦l o
"0 o o
II II n H II o
c CO
o cn ro NOJ 9 04
A o Ui Oi o ro
3 O O 3
ut
^0 *o ■0)o 3
0s </>

r°
k>
Concrete Tensile Strength, f t (psi) o
yi a> •>1 CD
o o o / o o
o o o o o

F igure 3.11. M inim um Percent Longitudinal Reinforcem ent to Satisfy C rack W idth C riterion
Highway Pavement>Structural Design
11-59

120 1 Steel Stress, 0^ (ksi)

— O t0 CD -0 01 41 Oi to
O O O O O O S O o o

U 1 1 - 1. 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
Undesirable

Design Temperature Drop, DTn (°F)

UlOtOl
o
rtY 3
o
O^CJl <-nn
Q

zr
co
O
<
CD
in
Concrete Shrinkage at 28 Days, Z (in/in)

o o o
o o o
o o o
00 OI N -fH
J-sl
O "oj
O o
O o

OJ
Tensile Stress Due to Wheel Load, 0 ^ (psi) o
o
o oH
"o
o
o r\>
o CJl
N
O
CD o
-ti
Concrete Tensile Strength, f f (psi) o

i t r / i
01
1 i 11
oo T>
o

O o o
O o o o
r° CO
■>i
/

OI 01 -4 to m
X
o
Percent Steel, P 3
w r* c N o •o
2. * „oH '
II II
(J)
oi w OI
Ow -4
"O °
W X I
— V)

O
~>l

Figure 3.12. M in im u m Percent Longitudinal Reinforcem ent to Satisfy Steel Stress C riteria
11-60 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 3.8. Exam ple A pplication of W orksheet for Longitudinal Reinforcem ent Design

DESIGN INPUTS
In p u t Variable Value In p u t Variable Value
Reinforcing Bar/Wire Diameter, Thermal Coefficient Ratio,
5/s (No 5) 1 32
0 (inches) a s/a c (in /in )
Concrete Shrinkage, Design Temperature Drop,
0 0004 55
Z (in /in ) DT d (°F)
Concrete Tensile Strength, Wheel Load Stress,
550 230
ft (psi) o w (psi)

DESIGN C RITER IA AND REQUIRED STEEL PERCENTAGE

C rack Allowable C rack Allowable Steel Design
Spacing, x W idth, CW max Stress, (os)max Steel
(feet) (inches) (ksi) Range**
Max 8 0
Value of Limiting Criteria 0 04 62
Min 3 5
Minimum Required Steel 0 43%
< 0 40% < 0 40% 0 43%
Percentage (Pmin)*
Maximum Allowable Steel 0 51%
0 51% px max
Percentage
♦Enter the largest percentage across line
**If Pmax < Pmin, then reinforcement criteria are in conflict, design not feasible
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-61

Table 3.9. Example Application of Worksheet for Revised Longitudinal Reinforcement Design

Change in Value from Previous Trial

Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial
Parameter 2 3 4 5 6
2Reinforcing Bar/Wire Diameter,
3/4 (No 6)
cf> (inches)
Concrete Shrinkage,
0 0004
Z (in /in )
2Concrete Tensile Strength,
550
f, (psi)
Wheel Load Stress,
230
o w (psi)
‘Design Temperature Drop,
550
DT d (°F)
Thermal Coefficient Ratio,
1 32
a s/a c
Allowable Crack Width Criterion,
0 04
CWmax (inches)
Allowable Steel Stress Criterion,
57
(tts)max (ksi)
Required Steel % for min < 0 04%
Crack Spacing max 0 57%
Minimum Required Steel %
0 43%
for Crack Width
Minimum Required Steel %
0 47%
for Steel Stress
Minimum % Reinforcement,
px min
. 0 47%

Maximum % Reinforcement,
p1 max 0 57%

‘Change in this parameter will affect crack width criterion

2Change in this parameter will affect steel stress criterion
11-62 Design o f Pavement Structures

The limiting criteria corresponding to these design over the other Thus, in this case, the selection should
conditions are as follows: be based on economics and/or ease of construction
(1) Allowable crack width, CW 0 04 inch for both
trial designs (See Section 3 3 2, “ Continu­ 3.4.3 Transverse Reinforcement
ously Reinforced Concrete Pavements, Limit­
ing Criteria ” ) Transverse steel is included in either jointed or
(2) Allowable steel stress, o s 62 ksi for 5/s-inch continuous pavements for conditions where soil vol­
bars (Trial 1) and 57 ksi for 3/4-inch bars (See ume changes (due to changes in either temperature or
Table 3 7 using tensile strength of 550 psi ) moisture) can result in longitudinal cracking Steel
Application of the design nomographs in Figures reinforcement will prevent the longitudinal cracks
3 10, 3 11, and 3 12 yields the following limits on from opening excessively, thereby maintaining maxi­
steel percentage for the two trial designs: mum load transfer and minimizing water entry
If transverse reinforcement and/or tie bars are
desired, then the information collected under Sec­
Trial Design 1: Pmin = 0 43%, Pmax — 0 51% tion 2 5 1, “ Reinforcement Variables for Jointed Re­
Trial Design 2 Pmin = 0 47 %, Pmax — Q 51% inforced Concrete Pavements,” is applicable In this
case, the “ slab length” should be considered as the
distance between free longitudinal edges If tie bars
The range (Nmin to Nmax) of the number of reinforcing are placed within a longitudinal joint, then that joint is
bars requires (assuming a 12-foot-wide lane) for each not a free edge.
trial design is For normal transverse reinforcement, Figure 3 8
may be used to determine the percent transverse steel
The percent transverse steel may be converted to spac­
Trial Design 1 (No 5 bars) N ■ = 19 2,
A1min ing between reinforcing bars as follows
N
A1max = 22 7
Trial Design 2 (No 6 bars) N ■ = 14 6,
A1min
N
A,max — 17 6

where
Using twenty No 5 bars for Trial l ( P =: 0 45%) and
fifteen No 6 bars for Trial 2 (P = 0 48%), the longi­ Y = transverse steel spacing (inches),
tudinal reinforcing bar spacings would be 7 2 and As = cross-sectional area of transverse
9 6 inches, respectively The predicted crack spacing, reinforcing steel (in 2),
crack width, and steel stress for these two trial designs P, = percent transverse steel, and
are: D = slab thickness (inches)

Figures 3 13 and 3 14 may be used to determine

Trial Design 1 Trial Design 2
the tie bar spacing for V2- and 5/8-diameter deformed
Predicted (20 No. 5 Bars, (15 No. 6 Bars,
bars, respectively The designer enters the figure on
Response P = 0.45%) P = 0.48%)
the horizontal with the distance to the closest free
Crack Spacing, edge axis and proceeds vertically to the pavement
x (feet) 4 3 4 6 thickness obtained from Section 3 2 2, “ Determine
Crack Width, Required Slab Thickness ” From the pavement thick­
CW (inches) 0 031 0 032 ness, move horizontally and read the tie bar spacing
Steel Stress, from the vertical scale These nomographs are based
o s (ksi) 60 55 on Grade 40 steel and a subgrade friction factor of
15
Note that since steel stress decreases from a maxi­
Inspection of these results indicates that there is no mum near the center of the slab (between the free
significant difference in the predicted response of edges) to zero at the free edges, the required minimum
these two designs such that one should be selected tie bar spacing increases Thus, in order to design the
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-63

(inches)
Tie Bar Spacing
Maximum

Distance to Closest Free Edge (feet)

Example: Distance from free edge = 24 ft

D = 10 in

Answer: Spacing = 16 in

Figure 3.13. Recommended Maximum Tie Bar Spacings for PCC Pavements Assuming
V2-inch Diameter Tie Bars, Grade 40 Steel, and Subgrade Friction Factor of 1.5
11-64 Design of Pavement Structures

Distance to Closest Free Edge (feet)

Example: Distance from free edge 24 ft

D = 10 in

Answer: Spacing = 24 in

Figure 3.14. Recommended Maximum Tie Bar Spacings for PCC Pavements Assuming
s/8-inch Diameter Tie Bars, Grade 40 Steel, and Subgrade Friction of 1.5
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-65

tie bars efficiently, the designer should first select the (2) Prestress is applied both parallel and perpen­
layout of the longitudinal construction joints dicular to the longitudinal axis of the pave­
Finally, if bending of the tie bars is to be permitted ment
during construction, then to prevent steel failures, the (3) Prestress is applied diagonally at an angle to
use of brittle (high carbon content) steels should be the longitudinal axis of the pavement Desired
avoided and an appropriate steel working stress level prestress levels both parallel and perpendicular
selected to the longitudinal axis of the pavement can be
obtained by merely adjusting the angle at
which the prestress is applied

3,5 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PAVEMENT The particular prestress orientation that the designer
wants to employ on a given project may have a signifi­
This section is provided to give the user some gen­ cant influence on the prestressing method that is used
eral guidelines on the design of prestressed concrete The following factors have a direct influence on the
pavement No specific design procedure can be pro­ performance of a PCP and must be considered in any
vided at this time rational PCP design approach subbase support, slab
A prestressed concrete pavement (PCP) is one in length, magnitude of prestress, tendon spacing, and
which a permanent and essentially horizontal com­ concrete fatigue Each is discussed in the following
pressive stress has been introduced prior to the sections
application of any wheel loads Past experience has
indicated the potential of PCP in at least two signifi­
cant respects: 3.5.1 Subbase

(1) more efficient use of construction materials, Although it has been demonstrated that acceptable
and performance of PCP can be obtained with low-
(2) fewer required joints and less probability of strength support if provisions are taken to prevent
cracking, resulting in less required mainte­ pumping, virtually all previous subbases for PCP have
nance and longer pavement life been fairly high-strength (usually 200 psi, or higher,
modulus of subgrade reaction) This is due primarily
In conventional concrete pavement design, stresses
to an unwillingness of the designers to risk failure of
due to wheel loads are restricted to the elastic range of
the pavement if it is constructed on a low-strength
the concrete Thus, the pavement thickness is deter­
subbase Although, soil cement and bituminous con­
mined such that the extreme fiber tensile stress due to
crete bases have been used to increase the strength of
applied loads does not exceed the flexural strength or
support, the most common method has been the use of
modulus of rupture of the concrete In this conven­
a layer of compacted granular material The thickness
tional design approach, the concrete between the ex­
of the layer has generally been on the order of 6 to
treme top and bottom fibers of the slab is not fully
12 inches, but as little as 4 inches and as much as
utilized to resist stresses due to applied loads, result­
18 inches has been used
ing in an inefficient use of construction materials
With PCP, the effective flexural strength of the con­
crete is increased by the induced compressive stress
and is no longer limited in load-carrying capacity by 3.5.2 Slab Length
the modulus of rupture of concrete Consequently, the
required pavement thickness for a given load is signif­ Slab length refers to the distance between active
icantly less than that required for a conventional con­ transverse joints and not to the distance between inter­
crete pavement mediate inactive construction joints There are two
On most of the previously constructed PCP’s, one main factors which must be considered when selecting
of the following prestressed orientations was em­ the optimum slab length for PCP These are (1) The
ployed: prestress force required to overcome the frictional re­
straint between the subgrade and the slab and to pro­
(1) Prestress is only applied parallel to the longitu­ vide the desired minimum compressive stress at the
dinal axis of the pavement The pavement may midlength of the slab so that it is proportional to the
be either unreinforced or reinforced in the slab length The cost associated with providing the
transverse direction prestress force is, in turn, proportional to the magni­
11-66 Design o f Pavement Structures

tude of the required force (2) The number of, and the dons, respectively The allowable stress in the tendon
total cost for, transverse joints is inversely propor­ is set at 0 8 yield stress, and generally 0 6-inch •
tional to the slab length Since transverse joints are strands are used
probably the largest maintenance item for a pavement,
total cost for transverse joints should not be based
only on the initial cost, but should also include an 3.5.5 Fatigue
estimate of the maintenance cost over the life of the
facility Generally, a compromise must be sought be­ Since very little data exists for the relationship
tween these two factors Based on PCP projects built between number of load repetitions and design re­
to date, a pavement length on the order of 400 feet quirements, it is recommended the designer use con­
appears to strike a reasonable balance between these servative load repetition factors at the present time
two constraints Slabs as long as 760 feet in length This is supported by the observation that little advance
have been built in the United States and some over warning accompanies the load failure of PCP, i e , a
1,000 feet in length have been built in Europe; how­ PCP may require only a few additional load repeti­
ever, these are exceptions tions to go from a few initial signs of distress to com­
plete failure

3.5.3 Magnitude of Prestress

The magnitude of the longitudinal and transverse 3.5.6 PCP Structural Design
prestress must be great enough to provide sufficient
compressive stress at the midlength and possible At this time, the design of PCP is primarily the
midwidth of the pavement slab during a period of con­ application of experience and engineering judgment
traction to sustain the stresses occurring during the The designer should recognize the basic principle that
passage of a load Many factors must be taken into the greater the prestress level, the thinner the pave­
account to assure that the desired prestress level is ment; however, full potential cannot be recognized
obtained including the magnitude of the frictional re­ since adequate thickness must be maintained to pre­
straint between the slab and the subgrade, the slab vent excessive deflection and the resulting problems
thickness, the slab length, and the maximum tempera­ The basic steps to PCP design are as follows
ture differential anticipated during the life of the (1) Select a pavement thickness using the criteria
pavement in the following section, and a practical magni­
On some of the early PCP projects, relatively high tude of prestress to be achieved at the center of
prestress levels were used so that sufficient prestress slab
was assured However, it has been shown by means of (2) Using the selected joint spacing and subbase
small-scale laboratory tests and full-scale field tests friction, compute the loss due to subgrade re­
that structural benefits do not increase in proportion to straint as outlined in a following section
increases in the prestress level Therefore, more re­ (3) Estimate the loss of prestress as described in a
cent projects have used prestress levels ranging from following section
100 to 300 psi longitudinally and from 0 to 200 psi (4) Add the desired magnitude of prestress from
transversely Step 1 to the losses from Steps 2 and 3 to
obtain the prestress level that must be applied
at the slab end
3.5.4 Tendon Spacing (5) The spacing of the tendons may be obtained by
the following formula
The main factors governing tendon spacing are
tendon size, magnitude of design prestress, allowable
concrete bearing stress at the tendon anchorages, and
Y = ft x Af
permissible tendon anchoring stress Although bar op X D
and stranded cable tendon spacings have varied from a
minimum of two to a maximum of eight times the slab
thickness, more typically, spacings of two to four where
times and three to six times the slab thickness have
been utilized for the longitudinal and transverse ten­ Yt = spacing of tendons (in ),
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-67

ft = allowable working stress in tendon fSR — pL/2

(psi),
Af = cross-sectional area of tendon (in 2),
where
D = selected pavement thickness (in ),
and
fSR = maximum subgrade restraint stress (psi),
o p = prestress level at end from Step 4
(X = coefficient of subgrade friction, and
L = length of slab (feet)
Pavement Thickness. Many factors of roadbed
strength, concrete strength, magnitude of prestress, PCP’s have generally been constructed on some
and expected traffic loads should be taken into ac­ type of friction-reducing layer such as sand and build­
count when determining the required thickness of ing paper, or sand and polyethylene sheeting When a
PCP In the past, highway PCP pavement thickness friction-reducing layer is provided, the coefficients of
has generally been determined more on the basis of subgrade friction usually range from 0 4 to 1 0
providing the minimum allowable concrete cover on
the prestressing tendons than on the basis of load- Prestress Losses. Factors contributing to loss of
carrying considerations This procedure has resulted prestress include (1) elastic shortening of the con­
in PCP thicknesses on the order of 40 to 50 percent of crete; (2) creep of the concrete, (3) shrinkage of the
equivalent conventional concrete pavement On pre­ concrete, (4) relaxation of the stressing tendons,
vious projects, highway pavement thicknesses have (5) slippage of the stressing tendons in the anchorage
usually been on the order of 4 to 6 inches devices; (6) friction between the stressing tendons and
the enclosing conduits, and (7) hydrothermal contrac­
Subgrade Restraint. Differential movement of tion of the pavement
PCP relative to the subbase occurs as a result of the Due to the above factors, prestress losses of ap­
elastic shortening of the pavement at the time of proximately 15 to 20 percent of the applied prestress
stressing, moisture/thermal changes in the pavement force should be expected for a carefully constructed
and creep of the pavement This movement is resisted pretensioned or post-tensioned PCP For a post­
by the friction between the pavement and the subgrade stressed PCP, all of the prestress may be lost unless
which induces restraint stresses in the pavement proper provision is made These losses must be ac­
These restraint stresses are additive to the design pre­ counted for in the design of a PCP in order to ensure
stress during periods when the pavement is increasing that the required prestress level is maintained over the
in length and subtractive from the design prestress service life of the pavement
when the pavement is decreasing in length Prestress losses for pretensioned and post-
The magnitude of the restraint stresses is a function tensioned PCP are generally expressed as a stress loss
of the coefficient of subgrade friction and the dimen­ in the tendons Therefore, the prestress applied to the
sions of the slab, and is at maximum at the midlength pavement by means of the tendons must be increased
and midwidth of the slab The maximum value of this to counter the stress losses resulting from natural
stress, from concrete having a unit weight of 144 pcf, adjustments in the materials during and after con­
is given by the following equation: struction
 CHAPTER 4
LOW-VOLUME ROAD DESIGN

Pavement structural design for low-volume roads is basic step-by-step procedures described in Chapter 3
divided into three categories: The primary difference in the design for low-volume
roads is the level of reliability that may be used Be­
(1) flexible pavements,
cause of their relative low usage and the associated
(2) rigid pavements, and
low level of risk, the level of reliability recommended
(3) aggregate-surfaced roads
for low-volume road design is 50 percent The user
This chapter covers the design of low-volume roads may, however, design for higher levels of 60 to 80
for these three surface types using procedures based percent, depending on the actual projected level of
on design charts (nomographs) and design catalogs traffic and the feasibility of rehabilitation, importance
These two procedures are covered in Sections 4 1 and of corridor, etc
4 2, respectively For surface treatment or chip seal If, in estimating an effective resilient modulus of
pavement structures, the procedures for flexible pave­ the roadbed material (MR) or an effective modulus of
ments may be used subgrade reaction (k), it is not possible to determine
Because the primary basis for all rational pavement the lengths of the seasons or even the seasonal road­
performance prediction methods is cumulative heavy bed soil resilient moduli, the following suggestions
axle load applications, it is necessary in this Guide to should be considered '
use the 18-kip equivalent single axle load (ESAL)
design approach for low-volume roads, regardless of Season Lengths. Figure 4 1 provides a map
how low the traffic level is or what the distribution is showing six different climatic regions of the United
between automobiles and trucks States and the environmental characteristics associ­
Since many city streets and county roads that fall ated with each Based on these regional characteris­
under the low-volume category may still carry signifi­ tics, Table 4 1 may be used to define the season
cant levels of truck traffic, the maximum number of lengths needed for determining the effective roadbed
18-kip ESAL applications considered for flexible and soil resilient modulus (Section 2 3 1) for flexible
rigid pavement design is 700,000 to 1 million The pavement design or the effective modulus of subgrade
practical minimum traffic level that can be considered reaction (Section 3 2 1) for rigid pavement design
for any flexible or rigid pavement during a given per­
formance period is about 50,000 18-kip ESAL appli­ Seasonal Roadbed Soil Resilient Moduli. Table
cations For the aggregate-surfaced (gravel) roads 4 2 provides roadbed soil resilient modulus values that
used for many county and forest roads, the maximum may be used for low-volume road design if the user
traffic level considered is 100,000 18-kip ESAL appli­ can classify the general quality of the roadbed mate­
cations, while the practical minimum level (during a rial as a foundation for the pavement structure If the
single performance period) is 10,000 suggested values in this table are combined with the
suggested season lengths identified in the previous
section, effective roadbed soil resilient modulus val­
4.1 DESIGN CHART PROCEDURES ues (for flexible pavement design only) can be gener­
ated for each of the six U S climatic regions These
4.1.1 Flexible and Rigid Pavements Mr values are presented in Table 4 3

The low-volume road design chart procedures for

flexible and rigid pavements are basically the same as 4.1.2 Aggregate-Surfaced Roads
those for highway pavement design The low-volume
road procedure basically relies on the set of design The basis for treating the effects of seasonal mois­
requirements (developed in Chapter 2) as well as the ture changes on roadbed soil resilient modulus, MR, is

11-69
11-70 Design of Pavement Structures

REGION CHARACTERISTICS

I Wet, no freeze
H Wet, freeze-thaw cycling
ttt Wet, hard-freeze, spring thaw
JSL Dry, no freeze
3C Dry, freeze-thaw cycling
3ZI Dry, hard freeze , spring thaw

Figure 4.1. The Six Climatic Regions in the United States (12)
Low-Volume Road Design 11-71

Table 4.1. Suggested Seasons Length (Months) for the Six U.S. Climatic Regions
Season (Roadbed Soil Moisture Condition)
U.S.
Climatic Winter Spring-Thaw Spring/Fall Summer
Region (Roadbed Frozen) (Roadbed Saturated) (Roadbed Wet) (Roadbed Dry)
I 0 ()♦ 00 7 5 4 5
II 10 0 5 7 0 3 5
III 2 5 15 4 0 4 0
IV 00 00 4 0 8 0
V 10 0 5 3 0 7 5
VI 30 15 3 0 4 5
♦Number of months for the season

Table 4.2. Suggested Seasonal Roadbed Soil Resilient Moduli, M r (psi), as a Function of the
Relative Quality of the Roadbed Material
Season (Roadbed Soil Moisture Condition)
Relative
Quality of Winter Spring-Thaw Spring/Fall Summer
Roadbed Soil (Roadbed Frozen) (Roadbed Saturated) (Roadbed Wet) (Roadbed Dry)
Very good 20,000^ 2,500 8,000 20,000
Good 20,000 2,000 6,000 10,000
Fair 20,000 2,000 4,500 6,500
Poor 20,000 1,500 3,300 4,900
Very poor 20,000 1,500 2,500 4,000
♦Values shown are Resilient Modulus in psi

Table 4.3. Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus Values, MR (psi), That May be Used
in the Design of Flexible Pavements for Low-Volume Roads. Suggested values
depend on the U.S. climatic region and the relative quality of the roadbed soil.
U.S.
Relative Quality of Roadbed Soil
Climatic
Region Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very
Good
I 2,800^ 3,700 5,000 6,800 9,500
II 2,700 3,400 4,500 5,500 7,300
III 2,700 3,000 4,000 4,400 5,700
IV 3,200 4,100 5,600 7,900 11,700
V 3,100 3,700 5,000 6,000 8,200
VI 2,800 3,100 4,100 4,500 5,700
♦Effective Resilient Modulus in psi
11-72 Design o f Pavement Structures

the same for aggregate-surfaced road design as it is for proportional to the resilient modulus of the roadbed
flexible or rigid pavement design Unlike the flexible soil during a given season A constant value of 30,000
or rigid design procedures, however, the design chart- psi was used in the example, however, since a portion
based procedure for aggregate-surfaced roads requires of the aggregate base material will be converted into
a graphical solution It is important to note that the an equivalent thickness of subbase material (which
effective modulus of the roadbed soil developed for will provide some shield against the environmental
flexible pavement design should not be used in lieu of moisture effects)
the procedure described here
The primary design requirements for aggregate- Step 4. Enter the seasonal 18-kip ESAL traffic in
surfaced roads (1 7) include Column 4 of Table 4 4 Assuming that truck traffic is
distributed evenly throughout the year, the lengths of
(1) the predicted future traffic, w 18 (Section
the seasons should be used to proportion the total pro­
2 1 2 ), for the period,
jected 18-kip ESAL traffic to each season If the road
(2) the lengths of the seasons (Section 2 3 1; or
is load-zoned (restricted) duiing Certain critical peri­
criteria in Section 4 1 1 may be used if better
ods, the total traffic may be distributed only among
information is not available),
those seasons when truck traffic is allowed (Total
(3) seasonal resilient moduli of the roadbed soil
traffic of 21,000 18-kip ESAL applications and a sea­
(Section 2 3 1 or general criteria in Section
sonal pattern corresponding to U S Climatic Region
4 1 1 may be used if better information is not
III was used in the example in Table 4 5.)
available),
(4) elastic modulus, EBS (psi), of aggregate base
Step 5. Within each of the four tables, estimate
layer (Section 2 3 3),
the allowable 18-kip ESAL traffic for each of the four
(5) elastic modulus, ESB (psi), of aggregate sub­
seasons using the serviceability-based nomograph in
base layer (Section 2 3 3),
Figure 4 2, and enter in Column 5 If the resilient
(6) design serviceability loss, A PSI (Section
modulus of the roadbed soil (during the frozen season)
2 2 1),
is such that the allowable traffic exceeds the upper
(7) allowable rutting, RD (inches), in surface layer
limit of the nomograph, assume a practical value of
(Section 2 2 2), and
500,000 18-kip ESAL
(8) aggregate loss, GL (inches), of surface layer
(Section 2 2 3)
Step 6. Within each of the four tables, estimate
These design requirements are used in conjunction the allowable 18-kip ESAL traffic for each of the four
with the computational chart in Table 4 4 and the de­ seasons using the rutting-based nomograph in Figure
sign nomographs for serviceability (Figure 4 2) and 4 3, and enter in Column 7 Again, if the resilient
rutting (Figure 4 3) An example of the application of modulus of the roadbed soil is such that the allowable
certain steps of this procedure is presented in Table traffic exceeds the upper limit of the nomograph, as­
4 5 sume a practical value of 500,000 18-kip ESAL

Step 1. Select four levels of aggregate base thick­ Step 7. Compute the seasonal damage values in
ness, Dbs, which should bound the probable solution each of the four tables for the serviceability criteria by
For this, four separate tables, identical to Table 4 4, dividing the projected seasonal traffic (Column 4) by
should be prepared Enter each of the four trial base the allowable traffic in that season (Column 5) Enter
thickness, DBS, in the upper left-hand corner of each these seasonal damage values in Column 6 of Table
of the four tables (DBS = 8 inches is used in the 4 4 corresponding to serviceability criteria Next, fol­
example) low these same instructions for rutting criteria, i e ,
divide Column 4 by Column 7 and enter in Column 8
Step 2. Enter the design serviceability loss as
well as the allowable rutting in the appropriate boxes Step 8. Compute the total damage for both the
of each of the four tables serviceability and rutting criteria by adding the sea­
sonal damages When this is accomplished for all four
Step 3. Enter the appropriate seasonal resilient tables (corresponding to the four trial base thick­
(elastic) moduli of the roadbed (MR) and the aggregate nesses), a graph of total damage versus base layer
base material, EBS (psi), in Columns 2 and 3, respec­ thickness should be prepared The average base layer
tively, of Table 4 4 The base modulus values may be thickness, DBS, required is determined by interpolat-
Low-Volume Road Design 11-73

3 © ROD
§ © 00 Ofi
00

®1 £
$ f t £

u
£in
o
OD
a

2!
§

Sn
■a© *C
©
u
CC
© ■s Ji ^ „ -
-a .w
u £
c«
■
M
o V Pm ■tsg %o.
^ £« 4 ?S
<Z2 <
©
W> | ? s fe
~ oo
A

- .a J
8 JS ■* <! u-
H" « «J
s v o W {S »
Vi ® « fas sT
OS
I PQ 'o’ -a iS *
-= ^ £MH ■?
Qg S
3 etf
DD
f3
m Id
fl*
u o 3 ?
a 3 I« S g s «
cjfi *2 *5 m i i f®
o * a *2 « r®
In WS W H S
,©

2 S3
U P5
"O
©

Tf S
w*' iW SC
c«fl 3
^g ^
a *t A
© © © M
©
<2« s s
I
'O v a I® rW
« 2 fa ® fa
« aV H |
«® a£ s3 ts
s © ►>
s*
• 2 § *i f | I
" e s s u ® Ia I
.1
o.5£ 03
CO
11-74 Design o f Pavement Structures

</>
a>
x:
a
c
(/>
00
o
(/)
(/)

Design Chart for Aggregate-Surfaced Roads Considering Allowable Serviceability Loss

<D
c
-X
o

oo 0)
>t
o
a>
to
a
<0 00

M a t e r i a l , M r (psi)
i i/^ ■ i i i .

to
TJ
o
o oC<0
3
O
c 0)
© a.
o 00
:8 >
3
D“ </>
oc
UJ
CL
o
I o
00
Figure 4.2.

Q . Q.
</> o Q.
"o O§ <
XI
- o’ o TJ
co ^ - o J O
o O _J
a
£
to
GO 00
to
0)
o Q UJ
X
<

o»
c
CO
Low-Volume Road Design 11-75

Allowable 18-kip Equivalent

Single Axle Load Applications, W.a (thousands)
i8 r u t ,

I i i i I I I II I l i I 11 ill i i I
O *
o o
o

Modulus of Aggregate /Base Layer, EBS (psi)

I . I I j 1, 1 I 1 I 111 -Exomple:
ro oi & to oi s Db s - 8 inches
o o o o o o o
8 io o "b o o
8 o
/ O o O O o
I o g o o o
RD = 2 5 inches
Mr = 4 ,9 0 0 psi
E b s = 3 0 ,0 0 0 psi
Solution: W1B = 2 9 ,0 0 0
18 R U T
(18-kip ESAL)

Resilient Modulus of Roadbed

Thickness of Aggregate Base Layer Considered

for Rutting C riteria , D0S (inches)

Figure 4.3. Design C h art for Aggregate-Surfaced Roads Considering Allowable R utting
n-76 Design o f Pavement Structures

CO *o co
s § 8P 2 O co co <N ON

|"C S i |83 * ©
<»o
V
wo
a
s hj
S 5§ . o o o ©
-8 IS CS o o o ©
a © Tj- ©^
« o © as
co <N
«! &

4> H
CN
(91) 0-A co Tf
68 oe 00 ©
CO
uo 00 rj*
► ©
Q £
{J cn
>>

■suo> m3
© © © ©
3 5§ « s © © © ©
4) Oh
(-1
C/5
V) | wS3 ©^ On ©^
C» < * -3*2 St ©
©
vd
s i efe

»-}
3 53 « © © © © ©
©
■ 9 W {S © © © © ©
® hk *50 ''t VO © ©
'5s•&2 C'T H
CN

© © © ©
« •- 5 s © © © ©
© ©^ © ©^
§ | la fi2~ P ©"
CO
©“
CO
©
CO
" ©"
CO
w £ W

CA
4>
J3 'O
I 4> © ©
£ •- ’3 &
~,B ©
CO
©
On
a O
« E4> l© *^h © CO*'
CN
c? (§ * S s
H P0
</i
Tf "Owe i ®
£ a S b o | 1*
Ǥ h
§ I 1 1 I .a § 1 1 I I £

“IIJ &.
S .© Xfl
Cfi
Low-Volume Road Design 11-77

ing in this graph for a total damage equal to 1 0 previous section, they are based on a unique set of
Figure 4 4 provides an example in which the design is assumptions relative to design requirements and envi­
controlled by the serviceability criteria: DBS is equal ronmental conditions The following specific assump­
to 10 inches tions apply to all three types of structural designs
considered:
Step 9. The base layer thickness determined in
(1) All designs are based on the structural require­
the last step should be used for design if the effects of
ment for one performance period, regardless
aggregate loss are negligible If, however, aggregate
of the time interval The range of traffic levels
loss is significant, then the design thickness is deter­
for the flexible and rigid pavement designs is
mined using the following equation:
between 50,000 and 1,000,000 18-kip ESAL
applications The allowable range of relative
DBs = DbS + (0 5 X GL) traffic for aggregate-surfaced road design is
between 10,000 and 100,000 18-kip ESAL
applications
where
(2) All designs presented are based on either a 50-
or 75-percent level of reliability
GL = total estimated aggregate (gravel) loss (in
(3) The designs are for environmental conditions
inches) over the performance period
corresponding to all six of the U S climatic
regions (See map in Figure 4 1 )
If, for example, the total estimated gravel loss was
(4) The designs are for five qualitative levels of
2 inches and the average base thickness required was
roadbed soil strength or support capability:
10 inches, the design thickness of the aggregate base
Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor, and Very Poor
layer would be
Table 4 2 indicates the levels of roadbed soil
resilient modulus that were used for each soil
Dbs = 10 -f (0 5 X 2) = 11 inches classification Table 4 1 indicates the actual
lengths of the seasons used to quantify the ef­
fects of each of the six climatic regions on
Step 10. The final step of the design chart proce­
pavement performance
dure for aggregate-surfaced roads is to convert a
(5) The terminal serviceability for the flexible and
portion of the aggregate base layer thickness to an
rigid pavement designs is 1 5 and the overall
equivalent thickness of subbase material This is ac­
design serviceability loss used for aggregate-
complished with the aid of Figure 4 5 Select the final
surfaced roads is 3 0 (Thus, if the initial serv­
base thickness desired, °BSf (6 inches is used in the
iceability of an aggregate-surfaced road was
example) Draw a line to the estimated modulus of the
3 5, the corresponding terminal serviceability
subbase material, ESB (15,000 psi is used in the exam­
inherent in the design solution is 0 5 )
ple) Go across and through the scale corresponding
to the reduction in base thickness, DBS; — °BSf
(11 minus 6 equal to 5 inches is used in the example)
4.2.1 Flexible Pavement Design Catalog
Then, for the known modulus of the base material, EBS
(30,000 psi in the example), determine the required
Tables 4 6 and 4 7 present a catalog of flexible
subbase thickness, DSB (8 inches)
pavement SN values (structural numbers) that may be
used for the design of low-volume roads when the
more detailed design approach is not possible Table
4.2 DESIGN CATALOG
4 6 is based on the 50-percent reliability level and
Table 4 7 is based on a 75-percent level The range of
The purpose of this Section is to provide the user
SN values shown for each condition is based on a
with a means for identifying reasonable pavement
specific range of 18-kip ESAL applications at each
structural designs suitable for low-volume roads The
traffic level
catalog of designs presented here covers aggregate-
surfaced roads as well as both flexible and rigid pave­
ments It is important to note, however, that although High 700,000 to 1,000,000
the structural designs presented represent precise so­ Medium 400,000 to 600,000
lutions using the design procedure described in the Low 50,000 to 300,000
11-78 Design o f Pavement Structures

Figure 4.4. Example Growth of Total Damage Versus Base Layer Thickness for Both
Serviceability and Rutting Criteria
Low-Volume Road Design 11-79

Final Base

(ltd) *s3 ‘snjnpoiq tsoqqn$

Thickness, Dnc (inches)

Required Subbase Thickness, 0$B (inches)

Figure 4.5. Chart to Convert a Portion of the Aggregate Base Layer Thickness To an
Equivalent Thickness of Subbase
11-80 Design of Pavement Structures

Table 4.6. Flexible Pavement Design Catalog for Low-Volume Roads: Recomm ended Ranges of
S tructural N um ber (SN) for the Six U.S. Clim atic Regions, T hree Levels of Axle Load
Traffic and Five Levels of R oadbed Soil Quality—Inherent Reliability: 50 percent
Relative
U.S. Clim atic Region
Q uality of Traffic
R oadbed Soil Level I II III IV V VI
Very good High 2 3-2 5* 2 5-2 7 2 8-3 0 2 1-2 3 2 4 -2 6 2 8-3 0
Medium 2 1-2 3 2 3-2 5 2 5-2 7 1 9-2 1 2 2-2 4 2 5-2 7
Low 1 5-2 0 1 7-2 2 1 9-2 4 1 4-1 8 1 6-2 1 1 9 -2 4
Good High 2 6-2 8 2 8-3 0 3 0-3 2 2 5-2 7 2 7-2 9 3 0-3 2
Medium 2 4-2 6 2 6-2 8 2 8-3 0 2 2-2 4 2 5-2 7 2 7 -2 9
Low 1 7-2 3 1 9-2 4 2 0-2 7 1 6-2 1 1 8-2 4 2 0 -2 6
Fair High 2 9-3 1 3 0-3 2 3 1-3 3 2 8-3 0 2 9-3 1 3 1-3 3
Medium 2 6-2 8 2 8-3 0 2 9-3 1 2 5-2 7 2 6-2 8 2 8-3 0
Low 2 0-2 6 2 0-2 6 2 1-2 8 1 9-2 4 1 9-2 5 2 1-2 7
Poor High 3 2-3 4 3 3-3 5 3 4-3 6 3 1-3 3 3 2-3 4 3 4 -3 6
Medium 3 0-3 2 3 0-3 2 3 1-3 4 2 8-3 0 2 9-3 2 3 1-3 3
Low 2 2-2 8 2 2-2 9 2 3-3 0 2 1-2 7 2 2-2 8 2 3-3 0
Very poor High 3 5-3 7 3 5-3 7 3 5-3 7 3 3-3 5 3 4-3 6 3 5-3 7
Medium 3 2-3 4 3 3-3 5 3 3-3 5 3 1-3 3 3 1-3 3 3 2-3 4
Low 2 4-3 1 2 4-3 1 2 4-3 1 2 3-3 0 2 3-3 0 2 4 -3 1
*Recommended range of structural number (SN)

Table 4.7. Flexible Pavement Design Catalog for Low-Volume Roads: Recommended Ranges of
S tru ctu ral N um ber (SN) for Six U.S. Clim atic Regions, Three Levels of Axle Load
Traffic and Five Levels of Roadbed Soil Quality— Inherent Reliability: 75 percent
Relative
U.S. Clim atic Region
Q uality of Traffic
R oadbed Soil Level I II III IV V VI
Very good High 2 6-2 7* 2 8-2 9 3 0-3 2 2 4 -2 5 2 7-2 8 3 0-3 2
Medium 2 3-2 5 2 5-2 7 2 7-3 0 2 1-2 3 2 4 -2 6 2 7-3 0
Low 1 6-2 1 1 8-2 3 2 0-2 6 1 5-2 0 1 7-2 2 2 0 -2 6
Good High 2 9-3 0 3 0-3 2 3 3-3 4 2 7-2 8 3 0-3 1 3 3-3 4
Medium 2 6-2 8 2 7-3 0 3 0-3 2 2 4-2 6 2 6-2 9 2 9-3 2
Low 1 9-2 4 2 0-2 6 2 2-2 8 1 8-2 3 2 0-2 5 2 2 -2 8
Fair High 3 2-3 3 3 3-3 4 3 4-3 5 3 0-3 2 3 2-3 3 3 4-3 5
Medium 2 8-3 1 2 9-3 2 2 7-3 3 2 7-3 0 2 8-3 1 3 0-3 3
Low 2 1-2 7 2 2-2 8 2 3-2 9 2 0-2 6 2 1-2 7 2 3-2 9
Poor High 3 5-3 6 3 6-3.7 3 7-3 9 3 4-3 5 3 5-3 6 3 7-3 8
Medium 3 1-3 4 3.2-3 5 3 4-3 6 3 0-3 3 3 1-3 4 3 3-3 6
Low 2 4-3 0 2 4-3 0 2 5-3 2 2 3-2 8 2 3-2 9 2 5-3 2
Very poor High 3 8-3 9 3 8-4 0 3 8-4 0 3 6-3 8 3 7-3 8 3 8-4 0
Medium 3 4-3 7 3 5-3 8 3 5-3 7 3 3-3 6 3 3-3 6 3 4 -3 7
Low 2 6-3 2 2 5-3 3 2 6-3 3 2 5-3 1 2 5-3 1 2 6-3 3
♦Recommended range of structural number (SN)
Low-Volume Road Design 11-81

Once a design structural number is selected, it is up to (5) Drainage (moisture) conditions are fair
the user to identify an appropriate combination of (Cd = 1 0)
flexible pavement layer thicknesses which will provide ( 6) The 18-kip ESAL traffic levels are
the desired load-carrying capacity This may be ac­
High 700.000 to 1,000,000
complished using the criteria for layer coefficients
Medium 400.000 to 600,000
(ar values) presented in Section 2 3 5 and the general
Low 50,000 to 300,000
equation for structural number

(7) The levels of roadbed soil quality and

SN — 3 jD] + a2D2 -I- a3D3
corresponding ranges of effective modulus of
subgrade reaction (k-value) are
where
Very Good Greater than 550 pci
a1; a2, a3 = layer coefficient for surface, base,
Good 400 to 550 pci
and subbase course materials,
Fair 250 to 350 pci
respectively, and
Poor 150 to 250 pci
Di, D2, D3 = thickness (in inches) of surface,
Very Poor Less than 150 pci
base, and subbase course,
respectively
4.2.3 Aggregate-Surfaced Road Design Catalog
4.2.2 Rigid Pavement Design Catalog
Table 4 10 presents a catalog of aggregate base
layer thicknesses that may be used for the design of
Tables 4 8a, 4 8b, 4 9a, and 4 9b present the cata­
low-volume roads when the more detailed design
log of portland cement pavement slab thicknesses that
approach is not possible The thicknesses shown are
may be used for the design of low-volume roads when
based on specific ranges of 18-kip ESAL applications
the more detailed design approach is not possible
at traffic levels
Tables 4 8a and 4 8b are based on a 50-percent relia­
bility level, without granular subbase and with granu­
lar subbase, respectively Tables 4 9a and 4 9b are High 60,000 to 100,000
based on a 75-percent level, without granular subbase Medium 30,000 to 60,000
and with granular subbase, respectively The assump­ Low 10,000 to 30,000
tions inherent in these design catalogs are as follows:
(1) Slab thickness design recommendations One other assumption inherent in these base thick­
apply to all six U S climatic regions ness recommendations is that the effective resilient
(2) If the option to use a subbase is chosen, it modulus of the aggregate base material is 30,000 psi,
consists of 4 to 6 inches of high quality regardless of the quality of the roadbed soil This
granular material value should be used as input to the nomograph in
(3) Mean PCC modulus of rupture (S') is 600 or Figure 4 5 to convert a portion of the aggregate base
700 psi thickness to an equivalent thickness of subbase mate­
(4) Mean PCC elastic modulus (Ec) is rial with an intermediate modulus value between the
5,000,000 psi base and roadbed soil
11-82 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 4.8(a). Rigid Design Catalog for Low-Volume Roads: Recommended M inim um PCC Slab
Thickness (Inches) for Three Levels of Axle Load Traffic and Five Levels of Roadbed
Soil Quality
Inherent reliability: 50 percent
Without Granular Subbase
Load Transfer Devices No Yes
Edge Support No Yes No Yes

S' (psi) 600 700 600 700 600 700 600 700
Relative Quality
of Roadbed Soil Low Traffic
Very good & good 5 5 5 5 5 5 25 5 5 5
Fair 55 5 5 25 5 5 25 5 5 5
Poor & very poor 55 5 25 5 25 5 55 5 5 5
Medium Traffic
Very good & good 6 25 5 75 5 75 5 25 6 5 5 5.5 5
Fair 6 25 5 75 5 75 5 25 6 55 55 5
Poor & very poor 6 25 5 75 5 75 5 25 6 5 5 5 5 5
High Traffic
Very good & good 7 6 25 6 25 5 25 65 6 5 75 5 25
Fair 7 6 25 6 25 5 75 65 6 6 5 5
Poor & very poor 7 6 5 6 5 6 65 6 6 5 5
Low-Volume Road Design 11-83

Table 4.8(b). Rigid Design Catalog for Low-Volume Roads: Recommended M inim um PCC Slab
Thickness (Inches) For Three Levels of Axle Load Traffic and Five Levels of Roadbed
Soil Quality
Inherent reliability 50 percent
With Granular Subbase
Load T ransfer Devices No Yes
Edge Support No Yes No Yes
(psi) 600 700 600 700 600 700 600 700
Relative Q uality
of R oadbed Soil Low Traffic
Very good & good 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Fair 5 25 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Poor & very poor 5 25 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
M edium Traffic
Very good & good 5 75 5 25 5 25 5 55 5 5 5
Fair 5 75 5 25 55 5 5 5 5 5 5
Poor & very poor 6 5 5 55 5 5 75 5 25 5 5
High Traffic
Very good & good 65 6 6 55 6 5 5 5 25 5
Fair 65 6 6 5 5 6 55 55 5
Poor & very poor 6 75 6 6 5 5 6 25 5 75 55 5
11-84 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 4.9(a). Rigid Design Catalog for Low-Volume Roads: Recommended M inim um PCC Slab
Thickness (Inches) for T hree Levels of Axle Load Traffic and Five Levels of Roadbed
Soil Quality
Inherent reliability: 75 percent
Without Granular Subbase
L oad T ransfer Devices No Yes
Edge Support No Yes No Yes
S' (psi) 600 700 600 700 600 700 600 700
Relative Quality
of R oadbed Soil Low Traffic
Very good & good 6 5 5 55 5 5 75 5 25 5.25 5
Fair 6 55 5 75 5 25 5 75 5 25 5 25 5
Poor & very poor 6 55 5 75 5 25 6 55 5 25 5
M edium Traffic
Very good & good 6 75 6 25 6 25 5 75 65 6 6 55
Fair 6 75 6 25 6 25 5 75 65 6 6 55
Poor & very poor 6 75 6 25 6 25 5 75 6 5 6 6 5 5
High Traffic
Very good & good 7 5 7 7 6 25 7 6 5 6 5 6
Fair 7 5 7 7 6 25 7 6 5 6 5 6
Poor & very poor 7 5 7 7 6 5 7 25 6 5 65 6
Low-Volume Road Design 11-85

Table 4.9(b). Rigid Design Catalog for Low-Volume Roads: Recommended M inim um PCC Slab
Thickness (Inches) for Three Levels of Axle Load Traffic an d Five Levels o f Roadbed
Soil Quality
Inherent reliability: 75 percent
With Granular Subbase
Load T ransfer Devices No Yes
Edge Support No Yes No Yes
S' (psi) 600 700 600 700 600 700 600 700
Relative Quality
of R oadbed Soil Low Traffic
Very good & good 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Fair 5 75 5 25 5 5 5 5 5 5
Poor & very poor 5 75 5 25 5 5 5 5 5 5
M edium Traffic
Very good & good 6 25 5 75 5 75 5 25 6 5 5 5 5 5
Fair 65 5 75 6 55 6 25 55 5 5 5
Poor & very poor 65 6 6 55 6 25 5 75 55 5 25
High Traffic
Very good & good 7 25 65 65 6 6 75 6 6 55
Fair 7 25 6 5 6 5 6 6 75 6 6 55
Poor & very poor 7 25 6 75 6 75 6 6 75 6 25 6 25 5 5
86 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 4.10. Aggregate Surfaced Road Design Catalog: Recommended Aggregate Base
Thickness (in Inches) for the Six U.S. Clim atic Regions, Five Relative
Q ualities of Roadbed Soil and Three Levels of Traffic
Relative
U.S. Clim atic Region
Q uality of Traffic
R oadbed Soil Level I II III IV V VI
Very good High 8* 10 15 7 9 15
Medium 6 8 11 5 7 11
Low 4 4 6 4 4 6
Good High 11 12 17 10 11 17
Medium 8 9 12 7 9 12
Low 4 5 7 4 5 7
Fair High 13 14 17 12 13 17
Medium 11 11 12 10 10 12
Low 6 6 7 5 5 7
Poor High ** ** ** ** ** **
Medium ** ** ** 15 15 **
Low 9 10 9 8 8 9
Very poor High ** ** ** ** ** **
Medium ** ** ** ** ** **
Low 11 11 10 8 8 9
♦Thickness of aggregate base required (in inches)
♦♦Higher type pavement design recommended
 REFERENCES FOR PART II

1 “ Flexible Pavement Designer’s Manual— 11 Kaplar, C W , “A Laboratory Freezing Test to

Part I,” Texas State Department of Highways Determine the Relative Frost Susceptibility of
and Public Transportation, Highway Division, Soils,” Technical Report TR 250, Cold Regions
1972 Research and Engineering Laboratory
2 “ Design Manual for Controlled Access High­ (CRREL), U S Army Corps of Engineers,
ways,” Texas Highway Department, January 1974
1960 12 Lister, N W , “ Deflection Criteria for Flexible
3 Van Til, C J , McCullough, B F , Vallerga, Pavements and Design of Overlays,” Proceed­
B A , and Hicks, R G , “ Evaluation of ings, Third International Conference on
AASHO Interim Guides for Design of Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements, Ann
Pavement Structures,” NCHRP Report 128, Arbor, 1972
1972 13 Finn, F N , and Saraf, C L , “ Development of
4 American Concrete Institute, “ Building Code Pavement Structural Subsystems,” NCHRP
Requirements For Reinforced Concrete,” (ACI Project No 1-10B, Woodward-Clyde Consult­
318-77) ants, February 1977
5 Rada, G , and Witczak, M W , “A Compre­ 14 Carey, W , and Irick, P , “ The Pavement Serv­
hensive Evaluation of Laboratory Resilient iceability Performance Concept,” Highway
Moduli Results for Granular Material,” TRB Research Board Record 250, 1980
Papers, 1981 15 Roberts, F L , McCullough, B F , William­
6 McCullough, B F , and Elkins, G E , “ CRC son, H J , and Wallin, W R , “A Pavement
Pavement Design Manual,” Austin Research Design and Management System for Forest
Engineers, Inc , October 1979 Service Roads: A Working Model—Phase II,”
7 McCullough, B F , “An Evaluation of Termi­ Research Report 43, Council for Advanced
nal Anchorage Installations on Rigid Pave­ Transportation Studies, University of Texas at
ments,” Research Report No 39-4F, Texas Austin, February 1977
Highway Department, September 1966 16 McCullough, B F , and Luhr, D R , “A Pave­
8 “ Mass Concrete for Dams and Other Massive ment Design and Management System for
Structures,” Proceedings, Journal of the Forest Service Roads Implementation—Phase
American Concrete Institute, Vol 67, April III,” Research Report 60, Council for Ad­
1970 vanced Transportation Studies, University of
9 Portland Cement Association, “Thickness Texas at Austin, January 1979
Design for Concrete Highway and Street 17 McCullough, B F , and Luhr, D R , “The
Pavements,” 1984 New Chapter 50” Revisions to the Transporta­
10 Majidzadeh, K , “ Observations of Field tion Engineering Handbook and New Pave­
Performance of Continuously Reinforced ment Design and Management System, Draft
Concrete Pavements in Ohio,” Report No Report Project FSH 7709 11, submitted by the
Ohio-DOT-12-77, Ohio Department of Trans­ Center for Transportation Research to Forest
portation, September 1978 Service, June 1982

11-87
 PART III
PAVEMENT DESIGN PROCEDURES
FOR REHABILITATION OF
EXISTING PAVEMENTS
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides an overview to Part III of the 1.2 SCOPE

Design Guide which examines the rehabilitation of
existing pavement systems A brief background The major objective of Part III is to present the
relative to the analysis procedures for rehabilitation is comprehensive framework of a method for selecting
first presented, followed by a discussion of the scope the best major rehabilitation strategy (or strategies)
of Part III Assumptions and limitations associated for use on a specific project It is important to recog­
with this material are discussed, as well as the general nize that major rehabilitation activities discussed in
organization and objectives of the chapters compris­ Part III encompass not only structural overlay proce­
ing Part III dures, but other major rehabilitation methods as well
Of equal importance is the fact that no guidance is
presented in Part III for the use of overlays as a tool to
1.1 BACKGROUND improve the skid-resistant qualities of a pavement
surface Guidance on skid resistance is contained in
The 1981 edition of the Design Guide contained a the 1976 AASHTO publication Guidelines fo r Skid
specific chapter dealing with overlay design proce­ Resistant Pavement Design
dures, but no unique AASHTO overlay method was The overall philosophy of the rehabilitation ap­
introduced The Guide simply presented a brief sum­ proach is based upon the AASHTO design-service-
mary overview of various overlay approaches and ability-performance concepts used in Part II for new
noted that, “ state highway agencies are encouraged to pavement designs This performance-based frame­
develop procedures applicable to their specific condi­ work allows for a combined design-rehabilitation
tions and requirements ” strategy to be analyzed over a predefined analysis per­
In recent years, the emphasis of highway construc­ iod This, in turn, allows for a comprehensive frame­
tion has gradually shifted from new design and con­ work to be developed in order to estimate the probable
struction activities to maintenance and rehabilitation life-cycle costs of any given strategy within the analy­
of the existing network This critical change in project sis period Such an approach is necessary if economic
emphasis clearly necessitates the development of principles are to be applied as one of the decision
guidelines for specific major rehabilitation procedures criteria for the eventual selection of the preferred re­
and their engineering consequences Thus, Part III habilitation strategy from several possible (and techni­
has been developed to expand the previous treatment cally feasible) solutions
of rehabilitation in the AASHTO Design Guide fo r While Part III is intended to serve as a self-
Pavement Structures contained solution method, the user will quickly dis­
The Guide methodologies presented in Part II cover the need to make direct use of the methodology
(Design of New/Reconstructed Pavements), coupled presented in Part II This is necessary because the
with the methodologies of Part III (Rehabilitation), structural overlay procedure presented here requires
afford the engineer with the means to develop a com­ new structural designs, found in Part II, as an integral
prehensive approach to pavement performance analy­ part of the rehabilitation analysis Also noteworthy is
sis on a project level management system framework that the approach presented for the structural overlay
When Parts II and III are used collectively, pavement analysis of pavement systems lends itself to develop­
performance may be assessed within an analysis per­ ing input for use with the more mechanistic overlay
iod that may encompass one or more rehabilitation approaches discussed in Part IV of the Guide
cycles In addition, both of these Parts are flexible in The structural overlay analysis presented in Part III
that they may be used independently to provide de­ is based, in part, on two relatively new concepts
tailed guidance relative to either new designs or major First, the role of nondestructive dynamic deflection
rehabilitation testing is emphasized as the key tool in evaluating

Ul-3
III-4 Design o f Pavement Structures

characteristics of the existing pavement In addition, technology are constantly improving the accuracy of
the concept of remaining pavement life is directly in­ this methodology in practice While the recognition of
corporated into the overlay methodology possible future improvements should be a consider­
The rehabilitation methodology of Part III is appli­ ation, the fundamental approach presented in Part III
cable to all major types of existing pavement systems can serve as the basic framework for structural overlay
Similarly, methods for both flexible and rigid overlays evaluation for the foreseeable future
are presented for any type of existing pavement sys­ Part III also incorporates the use of major rehabili­
tem Also discussed within the overall approach is the tation methods other than overlays In general, one of
use of either new (virgin) or recycled material as the the least understood areas of state of the art rehabilita­
sole source of material tion concerns the ability to confidently and accurately
Finally, while Part III examines a comprehensive predict probable performance (e g , serviceability-
approach to the rehabilitation of pavements, the traffic loading/time) for nonoverlay rehabilitation so­
user will note that the philosophy of methodology is lutions This is one of the most significant limitations
broader in scope than the more well-defined, methodi­ of the rehabilitation guidelines, and user agencies
cal solution of Part II The major reason for this is that are strongly encouraged to build a continuous and
significant differences exist between the current new accurate performance data base to increase the over­
design-performance relationships and rehabilitation all accuracy and confidence level of performance pre­
performance knowledge While analytical solutions to dictions In addition, while major nonoverlay reha­
portions of the rehabilitation methodology are pre­ bilitation methods are presented in Part III, the user
sented, the engineer must recognize that it may be must not view these as being all-inclusive As the state
impossible to accurately determine the optimal reha­ of the art increases, future revisions of Part III will
bilitation solution from a rigorous analytical model incorporate additional nonoverlay rehabilitation
However, the user should not be discouraged from methods that have been successfully used in practice
employing this approach but rather feel encouraged to The overlay design procedure for flexible pavement
use every available tool at his/her disposal to deter­ presented by these guidelines is considered to repre­
mine the problem cause, identify potentially sound sent the state of the art with respect to the rehabilita­
and economic solution alternatives, and then select tion of pavements with structural sections deficient
the most preferred rehabilitation strategy from sound in strength and/or thickness for the traffic loadings
engineering experience which have been applied, as evidenced by permanent
deformation For those pavements in which the pri­
mary distress mechanism is fatigue cracking without
1.3 ASSUMPTIONS/LIMITATIONS permanent deformation, other empirical or mechanis­
tic-empirical design piocedures based on nondestruc­
Because the structural overlay method is based, in tive testing may be more appropriate
part, on the AASHTO design-performance concepts With respect to rigid pavements, the following pro­
of Part II, the limitations and assumptions associated cedures are considered applicable and appropriate for
with the new pavement design methodology are appli­ those situations in which, based on visual observation
cable to the overlay portion of Part III The fundamen­ and the results of nondestructive tests, there exists a
tal approach used for all overlay-existing pavement structural section deficiency In those cases where the
combinations is based on the “Thickness Deficiency” distress mechanism is due to causes other than a defi­
overlay approach (i e , the existing thickness is in­ ciency in structural section thickness and/or strength,
adequate for anticipated future traffic) This requires avoidance of reflective cracking will control the de­
evaluation of the existing pavement system, princi­ sign of the rehabilitation
pally through the use of nondestructive testing (NDT),
to determine the effective structural capacity of the
existing pavement prior to overlay 1.4 ORGANIZATION
While the Thickness Deficiency approach has been
used in practice for many years, it lacks some degree Part III is organized into three major sections
of field verification for design-performance prediction Chapter 2 presents the general fundamentals associ­
when compared to the procedures for new pavement ated with pavement rehabilitation, rehabilitation
designs In addition, while the state of the art associ­ types, approaches to use, and the decision process for
ated with the use/analysis of NDT deflection data is selecting preferred rehabilitation treatment Chapter 3
considered good, changes and advancements in NDT details guidelines for collecting information from both
Introduction III-5

the field and historic records for use in the rehabilita­ lays are examined, while Chapter 5 details the struc­
tion process This information then forms the basis for tural overlay method for all pavement types Examples
the rehabilitation methodology presented Chapters 4 are presented in both chapters to illustrate and clarify
and 5 discuss the specific rehabilitation methods In procedure specifics
Chapter 4, rehabilitation approaches other than over­
 CHAPTER 2
REHABILITATION CONCEPTS

2.1 BACKGROUND methods discussed in Chapter 4 (Rehabilitation

Methods Other Than Overlay) may be used/required
The main objective of Part III is to provide guid­ as pre-overlay treatments in major rehabilitation
ance for major rehabilitation activities In this Guide, work
the term “ rehabilitation” encompasses the activities
described in the 4R program—resurfacing, restora­
tion, rehabilitation, and reconstruction In short, ma­ 2.2.2 Recycling Concepts
jo r rehabilitation activities will be viewed as any work
that is undertaken to significantly extend the service The broad category of material source is a primary
life of an existing pavement through the principles of factor in the rehabilitation process for the engineer to
resurfacing, restoration, and/or reconstruction consider Materials used in rehabilitation can be ob­
Major rehabilitation activities differ markedly tained from new (virgin) sources (i e , aggregates and
from periodic maintenance activities (sometimes binders), from recycled sources, or from a combina­
called normal, routine and/or preventive mainte­ tion of the two Cost should be the primary factor used
nance) in that the primary function of the latter activ­ in deciding to use recycling
ity is to preserve the existing pavement so that it may Recycling of existing pavement materials for reha­
achieve its applied loading, while rehabilitation is un­ bilitation purposes offers promise as a partial solution
dertaken to significantly increase the functional life by offering the following benefits: conservation of
While periodic maintenance is a vital part of the over­ aggregates, binders, and energy, preservation of the
all performance cycle of any highway, this topic is not environment and existing pavement geometries and
discussed within Part III Therefore, no guidance is the benefits associated with a potential reduction in
presented relative to the use of thin asphaltic overlays project cost Appendix 00 contains a more detailed
(generally less than 3U inch), overlays of short (spot) discussion of recycling in terms of definitions, types
length, pavement patching, pothole repairs, routine of recycling, and design material properties for recy­
sealing of cracks and joints, miscellaneous repair of cled materials
minor pavement failures, slab sealing (other than as an
essential part of major rehabilitation), or any other
work designed to preserve the existing pavement 2.2.3 Construction Considerations
system
Another important factor in the major rehabilita­
tion process is the choice of construction method The
engineer should view the full-depth reconstruction of
2.2 REHABILITATION FACTORS a pavement as the extreme opposite of a full overlay
Obviously, a wide range of construction choices be­
2.2.1 Major Categories tween these two limits is feasible (e g , partial-depth
reconstruction with or without the application of an
As noted, Part III of the Design Guide specifically overlay)
addresses major rehabilitation pavement activities
For simplicity, major rehabilitation is subdivided into
two major categories: 2.2.4 Summary of Major Rehabilitation Factors
(1) Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay
The previous sections clearly indicate that major
(2) Rehabilitation Methods With Overlays
rehabilitation strategies should be viewed in a broad
These categories will be discussed in Chapters 4 context with reference to three major factors They
and 5, respectively It should be recognized that some are

III-7
III-8 Design of Pavement Structures

(1) the selection of a major rehabilitation category ply serves as a reminder of the potentially large num­
that may or may not involve an overlay ber of initial strategies that may be investigated to
(resurfacing) arrive at a final rehabilitation recommendation It
(2) the decision to use new (virgin) materials, re­ should be noted that two major rehabilitation con­
cycled materials, or a combination of both (it cepts, recycling and break/seat approach for asphalt
should be noted that recycled materials need overlays over existing rigid pavements, are directly
not be those obtained from the specific pave­ integrated into discussions/methodologies that deal
ment project being rehabilitated, but may be with the structural analysis of overlay systems
obtained from a variety of other recycled mate­
rial stockpiles)
(3) the decision to employ full reconstruction
(i e , complete removal/replacement), partial 2.3 SELECTION O F ALTERNATIVE
reconstruction, a direct (full) overlay, or some REHABILITATION M ETHODS
combination of reconstruction and overlay
2.3.1 Overview
Since the major factors listed above may act in combi­
nation with each other, the engineer quickly realizes This section provides overall guidance for the se­
that a complex combination of rehabilitation alterna­ lection of pavement rehabilitation methods Pavement
tives exists for a single project For example, rehabili­ rehabilitation is as much an art as a science With the
tation of a structurally failed (cracked) PCC pavement exception of the various overlay models presented in
requires the analysis of several potential rehabilitation Chapter 5, there are no definitive equations, guides,
strategies before the optimum or preferred strategy or step-by-step procedures that one can use to “ cook­
can be selected The optimum solution will be ob­ book” a proper rehabilitation design Therefore, a
tained by a life-cycle cost analysis considerable amount of both analysis and engineering
Many of the rehabilitation methods available are judgment must be applied to each project Due to state
presently being tried on an experimental basis and of the art limitations relative to the entire rehabilita­
lack full verification Part III deals only with major tion process, a definite need exists for continuous
rehabilitation methods Table 2 1 summarizes these feedback from agencies on the performance of various
methods and cites their chapter location This list sim­ rehabilitation methods

Table 2.1. M ajor R ehabilitation Concepts in Guide

D escription/Factor Guide Location
Rehabilitation methods other than overlay Chapter 4
1 Full depth pavement repair
2 Partial depth pavement repair
3 Joint and crack sealing
4 Subsealing of concrete pavements
5 Grinding/milling of pavements
6 Subdrainage design
7 Pressure relief
8 Restoration of joint load transfer
9 Surface treatments
Rehabilitation methods with overlay Chapter 5
1 Flexible overlay/flexible existing
2 Flexible overlay/rigid existing
3 Rigid overlay/flexible existing
4 Rigid overlay/rigid existing
Special rehabilitation
1 Recycling Appendix OO, Chapter 5
2 Break/seat Chapter 5
Rehabilitation Concepts III-9

Despite incomplete knowledge, the engineer must Specific data collection items depend in part on the
make rehabilitation decisions based on the most ade­ type of rehabilitation being considered For example,
quate information available There are no “ right” and if grinding of a concrete pavement is being consid­
“ wrong” solutions to pavement rehabilitation prob­ ered, the pavement design, hardness of the large ag­
lems, but rather “ better” or “ optimum” solutions gregate in the concrete, traffic level, surface profile,
The truly “ optimum” solution, which maximizes traffic control options, and magnitude of faulting must
benefits while minimizing costs, is often not attainable be known Figure 2 2 summarizes the data required
due to constraints imposed (i e , limited funding) for specific rehabilitation alternatives
However, there will be a “ preferred” solution which Each agency should develop guidelines to deter­
is cost-effective, has other desirable characteristics, mine what data to collect, as well as standard proce­
and meets the existing constraints The engineer has a dures for collection
responsibility to determine, to the best of his or her
ability, the most “ preferred” rehabilitation method Data Evaluation. During the data collection and
given particular conditions and limitations evaluation process, the engineer should acquire ade­
While selection of the preferred solution is a very quate information to thoroughly define the problem
complex engineering problem, rehabilitation analysis Because limited time and funds are allotted to this
is made easier by using a logical step-by-step ap­ portion of the rehabilitation process, each agency
proach The fundamentals of the approach are based should develop a standard data collection/evaluation
on the necessity to: (1) determine cause of the dis­ procedure that best suits its information, personnel,
tresses) or pavement problems, (2) develop a candi­ and equipment resources A sample procedure is out­
date list of solutions that will properly address (cure lined below
and prevent future occurrences) the problem, and (3)
select the preferred rehabilitation method given eco­
nomic and other project constraints The principal Step 1. Office Data Collection—includes infor­
steps in this selection process are illustrated in Figure mation such as location of the project, year con­
2 1 and are described in detail in this section structed, year and type of major maintenance,
pavement design, materials and soils properties, traf­
fic, climate conditions, and any available performance
data
2.3.2 Problem Definition

Phase I of the pavement rehabilitation selection Step 2. First Field Survey—includes items such
process is problem definition To avoid making an as distress, drainage conditions, subjective roughness,
inaccurate problem definition, the engineer must col­ traffic control options, and safety considerations De­
lect and evaluate enough information about the pave­ tailed procedures for collecting pavement condition
ment to adequately comprehend the situation The data are given in Part III, Chapter 3
premature failure of many rehabilitated pavements can
be traced to inadequate evaluation In summary, the Step 3. First Data Evaluation and the Determina­
first step is to identify/establish the condition of the tion of Additional Data Needs—based on this first
pavement evaluation, a list of candidate rehabilitation alterna­
tives may be developed to aid in assessing additional
Data Collection. Pavement evaluation requires data needs
substantial data collection, which can be divided into
the following major categories Step 4. Second Field Survey—detailed measuring
pavement condition and testing, includes such items as coring and
shoulder condition sampling, roughness measurement, deflection testing,
pavement design skid resistance, drainage tests, and vertical clear­
geometric design ances
materials and soils properties
traffic volumes and loadings Step S. Laboratory Testing of Samples—includes
climate conditions tests such as material strength, resilient modulus,
drainage conditions permeability, moisture content, composition, density,
safety considerations and gradations (if felt to be necessary)
111-10 Design o f Pavement Structures

P H A S E 1 P R O B L E M DEFINITION

A COLLECT D A T A
«-------------------
J/
B EVALUATE D A T A -------------------)

C IDENTIFY C O N S T R A I N T S
--------- ?

4 f .....................
P H A S E 2 POTENTIAL P R O B L E M S O L U T I O N S

P H A S E 2 S ELECTION O F P R E F E R R E D S O L U T I O N
>
A C O S T ANALYSIS

B N O N M O N E T A R Y CONSIDERATIONS

C P R E F E R R E D REHABILITATION
ALTERNATIVE

SS .
D DETAILED D E S I G N

Figure 2.1. The Pavement Rehabilitation Selection Process

 PARTIAL PRESSURE LOAD
DATA FULL-DEPTH DEPTH SLAB JOINT REBEL TRANSFER SURFACE
REQUIRED REPAIR PATCHING GRINDING RECYCLING UNDERSEALING JACKING SUBDRAINS RESEALING JOINTS RESTORATION TREATMENT OVERLAY

®
®
®

®
®

®
®
®
PAVEMENT DESIGN

ORIGINAL
•

•
•
•

•
•
CONSTRUCTION
DATA
•

•
•

S
ID
Rehabilitation Concepts

•
•
®

MATERIALS

®
PROPERTIES

•
®

®
SUBGRADE
•

•
•

•
®

CLIMATE

•
•
®
®
®

TRAFFIC LOADINGS

®
®
AND VOLUMES
0
®

®
®

®
®

®
DISTRESS

(?)

(?)

(?)
•

•
•
®

Z
Q
1-
(?) (?)

DESTRUCTIVE
•

•
®

®
®
TESTING &

(?)
SAMPLING

•
ROUGHNESS
•

SURFACE

(?)

(?)
PROFILE
•

•
®
®

®
DRAINAGE
(?)

(?)
•
•
•

•
•

•
PREVIOUS

®
MAINTENANCE

BRIDGE
®

PUSHING
•

•
®

®
®
UTILITIES

TRAFFIC
®
®

®
®
®
®
®

®
®
®
CONTROL
(?)

OPTIONS
•

VERTICAL

®
CLEARANCE
•

•
GEOMETRICS

KEY (•) DEFINITELY NEEDED • DESIRABLE

Figure 2.2. Data Required for Various Rehabilitation Techniques

111-11
111-12 Design o f Pavement Structures

Step 6. Second Data Evaluation—includes struc­ ful planning should be used to circumvent these
tural evaluation, functional evaluation, and determina­ constraints; the more they are permitted to affect a
tion of additional data requirements, if any project, the less likelihood there is of obtaining the
best available solution
Step 7. Final Field and Office Data Compila­
tion—preparation of a final evaluation report
To some extent, project size dictates the amount of 2.3.3 Potential Problem Solutions
time and money that may justifiably be spent on pave­
ment evaluation Major highways and high traffic Phase 2 of the pavement rehabilitation selection
volume roads certainly require a more thorough and process, as outlined in Figure 2 1, is the identification
comprehensive evaluation than do low-volume roads of potential problem solutions The first step in this
The collected data must be carefully evaluated and phase is the identification of candidate solutions that
summarized in a systematic fashion Figure 2 3 appear to be technically feasible in solving a pavement
presents a comprehensive list of factors to examine in deterioration problem Next, candidate solutions are
an adequate pavement evaluation Each agency should subjected to the project constraints, and those that
adapt this list according to their own particular needs meet the constraints are considered feasible rehabilita­
It is vital that the agency then develop procedures and tion solutions
guidelines for consistently answering the questions on
their list Many items can be obtained for evaluation Select Candidate Solutions. After completion of
from existing data routinely collected Agencies hav­ Phase 1, Problem Definition, the design engineer
ing substantial pavement management systems will al­ should be able to suggest several candidate rehabilita­
ready have a large block of information in their data tion solutions Candidate solutions are those which
banks Other items will require direct field testing for address the causes of the deterioration and are effec­
current or detailed information tive in both repairing the existing distress and prevent­
ing, as much as possible, recurrence After selecting
Identify Constraints. Constraints placed on a candidate solutions, the engineer must determine the
pavement rehabilitation project should be identified quantity of work required by each alternative, since
during the problem definition phase since they fre­ this will have a bearing on cost
quently affect the choice of rehabilitation alternative It is very easy, and very unwise, to perform a
Some constraints which may restrict alternative selec­ “ quick fix,” or worse yet, a cosmetic treatment, on a
tion are deteriorated pavement Funds spent on such super­
ficial repairs are funds wasted If mechanisms which
limited project funding
cause distress are not treated, the distress will con­
traffic control problems (lane closure
tinue to appear and increase in severity The short­
availability)
lived benefits achieved from superficial repairs never
minimum desirable life of rehabilitation
justify the costs The quick fix treatments are not
geometric design problems
inherently bad; they are simply uneconomical
utilities
In general, rehabilitation is considered only for
clearances
significantly damaged portions of a pavement For in­
right-of-way
stance, if one mile of a three-mile pavement section is
available materials and equipment
badly distressed, usually only that one mile receives
contractor expertise and manpower
rehabilitation This does not mean that only high-
agency policies
severity distress merits rehabilitation work It may be
A particularly difficult constraint to deal with in­ economically justifiable to spend additional funds re­
volves network considerations When evaluating the pairing some lower-severity distress at the same time
problems of a particular pavement and the possible adjacent high-severity distress is being corrected The
rehabilitation alternatives, an agency must consider additional cost must be weighed against the benefit
the needs and priorities of the entire network for obtained by “ intercepting” distress at an earlier stage
which it is responsible The best rehabilitation ap­ in its development Also, in terms of convenience, it
proach for an individual project may not be in the best may be beneficial to carry out simultaneous repairs on
interest of the network as a whole both high- and low-severity distress on a high-volume
Project constraints often limit the number of reha­ road if major rehabilitation work creates significant
bilitation alternatives available Where possible, care­ traffic-handling problems
Rehabilitation Concepts 111-13

STR U CTU R A L EVALUATION

Existing distress:
Little or not load-associated distress
Moderate load-associated distress
Major load-associated distress
Structural Load-Carrying Capacity Deficiency:
Yes, No

FUNCTIO NAL EVALUATION

Roughness:
Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor, Very Poor
M easurement:_________________________________________________ _
Present Serviceability Index/Rating:____________________________________
Skid Resistance:
Satisfactory, Questionable, Unsatisfactory
Rutting Severity:
Low, Medium, High

VARIATION OF CONDITION EVALUATION

Systematic variation along project:
Yes, No
Systematic variation between lanes:
Yes, No
Localized variation (very bad areas) along project:
Yes, No

CLIM ATIC E FFE C TS EVALUATION

Climatic Zone
Moisture Region: I Moisture throughout year
II Seasonal moisture
III Very little moisture
Temperature Region: A Severe frost penetration
B Freeze-thaw cycles
C No frost problems
Severity of moisture-accelerated damage:
Low, Medium, High
Describe (asphalt stripping, pumping, _____________________________)
Subsurface drainage capability-BASE:
Satisfactory, Marginal, Unacceptable
Subsurface drainage capability-SUBGRADE:
Satisfactory, Marginal, Unacceptable
Surface drainage capability:
Acceptable, Needs Improvement
Describe:_______________________________ ________________________

PAVEM ENT M ATERIALS EVALUATION

Surface-Sound condition. Deteriorated
Describe:________________________________________________________
Base-Sound condition, Deteriorated
Describe:________________________________________________________
Subbase-Sound condition. Deteriorated
Describe:________________________________________________________

Figure 2.3. Overall Pavement Evaluation Sum m ary and Checklist

111-14 Design of Pavement Structures

SU B G R A D E EVALUATION
Structural support:
Low, Medium, High
Moisture softening potential:
Low, Medium, High
Temperature problems:
None, Frost Heaving, Freeze-Thaw Softening
Sw elling Potential:
Yes, No

PREVIO U S M AINTENANCE PERFORM ED EVALUATION

Minor, Normal, Major
Has lack of maintenance contributed to deterioration?
Yes, No
Describe:___________________________________

RATE OF DETERIORATION EVALUATION

Long Term:
Low, Normal, High
Short Term:
Low, Normal, High

TRA FFIC CO N TRO L DURING CONSTRUCTION

Are detours available so that facility can be closed?
Yes, No
Must construction be accomplished under traffic?
Yes, No
Could construction be done at off-peak hours?
Describe___________________________________

GEO M ETRIC AND SA FETY FACTO RS

Current Capacity:
Adequate, Inadequate
Future Capacity:
Adequate, Inadequate
Widening Required Now:
Yes, No
List high-accident locations:_______________________
Bridge clearance problems:_______________________
Lateral obstruction problems:-----------------------------------
Utilities problems:----------------------------------------------------
Bridge pushing problems:----------------------------------------

TRA FFIC LO ADIN G S

ADT(two-way):--------------------------------------------------------
AADT(two-way):------------------------------------------------------
Accumulated 18-kip ESA L/year:------------------------------
Current 1 8-kip E S A L / y e a r: — --------------------------

SH O U LD ER S
Pavement Condition:
Good, Fair, Poor
Localized Deteriorated Areas:
Yes, No

Figure 2.3. Continued—Overall Pavement Evaluation Sum m ary and Checklist

Rehabilitation Concepts 111-15

Feasible Rehabilitation Solutions. As stated, the skill and care with which the work is
feasible rehabilitation solutions for a particular case of performed
pavement distress are obtained by weighing candidate the quality of the materials used
solutions against project constraints A feasible alter­ environmental conditions prevalent in the
native is defined as one that addresses the cause of the region where the pavement exists
distress and is effective in both repairing the existing the traffic which uses the pavement
deterioration and preventing its recurrence, while sat­ other rehabilitation and maintenance work
isfying all the imposed constraints being performed concurrently
A feasible rehabilitation alternative may encom­
pass more than one repair technique Combined reha­ Even the engineer familiar with the performance of
bilitation techniques may be necessary to repair either various rehabilitation methods in his or her local area
single- or multiple-distress types for a particular can appreciate the difficulty of selecting appropriate
project It is the engineer’s responsibility, based on inputs for use in the life-cycle cost analysis To elimi­
project evaluation results, to determine the techniques nate as much uncertainty as possible, it is essential to
or combination of techniques to be considered as fea­ begin collecting rehabilitation performance data in the
sible rehabilitation alternatives for a particular pave­ pavement management data bank This is crucial to
ment life-cycle cost analysis
Another important consideration regarding life­
Development o f Preliminary Designs. After all cycle cost analysis is that the same rehabilitation
feasible alternatives have been selected, preliminary techniques, when applied to different pavements, may
designs should be prepared Preliminary design, in­ have variant effects Furthermore, some methods may
cluding such things as approximate overlay thickness keep a pavement at a consistently high-condition
selection, requires only approximate cost estimates level, while others may allow the condition of the
Design rehabilitation projects require as much techni­ same pavement to fluctuate Thus, discrepancy is of­
cal expertise as new pavement design ten not revealed by the cost analysis if user costs are
not included in the calculations It is therefore impor­
tant to include user costs in a cost analysis

2.3.4 Selection of Preferred Solution

Nonmonetary Considerations. Several non­
Phase 3 of the pavement rehabilitation selection monetary factors should be considered when deter­
process, as illustrated in Figure 2 1, is the selection of mining the preferred rehabilitation method Some of
a preferred solution There is no infallible method for these factors are
selecting the most “ preferred” rehabilitation alterna­
tive for a given project Rather, the selection process service life
requires considerable engineering judgment, creativ­ duration of construction
ity, and flexibility Each agency should develop a pro­ traffic control problems
cedure to select preferred solutions for their projects reliability (proven design in region)
using both monetary and nonmonetary considerations constructibility
maintainability
Cost Analysis. Cost of rehabilitation alternatives
As with monetary considerations, the service life of a
is generally considered the most important decision
rehabilitation method is an important factor This is
criteria when choosing the preferred solution The
particularly significant to agencies responsible for
various types of costs incurred over the life of a pave­
high-volume roads, for which lane closures and traffic
ment are discussed in Part I of this Guide Presented
delays pose considerable difficulties The important
here are a few important points about life-cycle cost
time parameter is years of pavement life extension
analysis as it pertains to the selection of a rehabilita­
achieved by the rehabilitation methods and should be a
tion method
factor in almost any decision criterion used by the
Life-cycle cost analysis requires inputs of both cost
agency
and time Unfortunately, both of these elements are
subject to a large degree of uncertainty For instance,
the effective life of a rehabilitation technique is sub­ Preferred Rehabilitation Alternative. The pre­
ject to the following influences: ferred rehabilitation alternative for a project is se­
111-16 Design o f Pavement Structures

lected using, first, monetary and then nonmonetary 2.3.5 Summary

factors Whenever the cost analysis does not indicate a
clear advantage for one of the feasible alternatives, the A logical procedure for selecting the preferred re­
nonmonetary factors may be used to aid in the selec­ habilitation method is presented in Figure 2 1 It pro­
tion process A method for measuring several rehabil­ vides the engineer with guidance in organizing and
itation alternatives against criterion that cannot be evaluating the information available about the pave­
expressed in monetary units is depicted in Figure 2 4 ment, identifying needs for further information and
First, the relative importance of each criterion is as­ evaluation, developing feasible rehabilitation alterna­
signed by the design team Next, the alternatives are tives, and selecting the preferred alternative from
rated according to their anticipated performance in the among these using sound engineering principles
criterion areas Then, an alternative’s rating in an area This step-by-step procedure can help the engineer
is multiplied by the assigned weight of that factor to conserve time and money in selecting the rehabilita­
achieve a “ score” Finally, all of the scores for an tion method which best meets the pavement’s needs,
alternative are summed, and the alternative with the satisfies all the project constraints, and reflects the
highest score is the preferred solution This procedure agency’s priorities concerning use of available funds,
has been used successfully on projects to select the performance demanded of the rehabilitation work, and
preferred pavement rehabilitation alternative needs of the agency’s pavement network If the proce­
dure is well-documented and tempered by good
engineering judgement, the selection of a particular
Detailed Design. Once the preferred rehabilita­
rehabilitation method for a project will be justifiable
tion method has been selected, detailed design plans,
to management and the public Perhaps most impor­
specifications, and estimates are prepared If a major
tant, a systematic procedure for selecting rehabilita-r
difference in design, cost, or condition occurs dur­
tion methods can move an agency away from the
ing this phase, it may be necessary to reinvestigate
traditional “ standard fix” approach of rehabilitating
whether this alternative is still a cost-effective so­
its pavements, toward a policy of custom designing
lution
rehabilitation to truly meet the pavements needs
Rehabilitation Concepts 111-17

Figure 2.4. Illustrative Method of Selecting Rehabilitation Alternatives

 CHAPTER 3
GUIDES FOR FIELD DATA COLLECTION

3.1 OVERVIEW of the pavement segments on either side will be no­

ticeably different, as indicated in the figure
This chapter provides guidance and background in­ The existence of deviation when measuring a pave­
formation relative to field data collection surveys and ment can be traced to two major sources The first
measurements used in the rehabilitation process Of source of variation is termed “ between unit variabil­
particular importance are: ity” and reflects the fact that statistically homogene­
ous units may exist within a given rehabilitation
(1) the interpretative techniques used with contin­
project The ability to delineate the general boundary
uously measured pavement variables along a
locations of these units is critical in rehabilitation be­
highway, such as deflection, serviceability in­
cause these units form the basis for the specific analy­
dex, skid number, etc , and the associated
sis to be conducted For instance, for the variable
methodologies that can be used to define the
response depicted in Figure 3 1, four separate rehabil­
boundary limits of relatively uniform analysis
itation studies may be warranted (i e , four separate
units,
overlay design thicknesses)
(2) the development and utilization of pavement
The other major source of variability is the inherent
condition surveys;
diversity of the response variable within each unit,
(3) the development and utilization of drainage
thus called “ within unit variability” Within unit varia­
surveys,
bility is important because it relates to the eventual
(4) the general considerations associated with
rehabilitation design reliability obtained for a given
NDT (Nondestructive Testing) deflections
project
(types of equipment, use and interpretation of
Proper consideration of both between unit and
deflection results); and
within unit variability has a positive impact on reha­
(5) the use of destructive sampling and testing pro­
bilitation design which cannot be overemphasized If
grams to augment field NDT
care is not exercised in the delineation of units and
their internal variation, gross inefficiencies in the re­
habilitation strategy will occur; every unit will either
3.2 THE FUNDAMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT
be underdesigned (i e , premature failure) or over-
designed (uneconomical use of materials)
3.2.1 General Background

When considering a major rehabilitation project,

3.2.2 Methods of Unit Delineation
pavement monitoring activities are undertaken to
obtain measurements, either continuous or discontin­
Idealized Approach. In order to delineate a pave­
uous/point, which assess pavement response varia­
ment length, the engineer should isolate each unique
bles Examples of pavement response variables are
factor influencing potential pavement performance
deflection, serviceability index, friction number,
These factors are
pavement condition indices, or even individual dis­
tress severities such as percent cracking, rut depth, pavement type
etc construction history (including rehabilitation
Figure 3 1 illustrates the typical plot of a response and major maintenance)
variable as a function of distance along the highway pavement cross section (layer material
segment Measurement of a response variable indi­ type/thickness)
cates change from one location to another, with some subgrade (foundation)
points experiencing changes of major magnitude At traffic
these points of significant change, the overall response pavement condition

III-19
 111-20

r
Pavement Response Variable
O

Figure 3.1. Typical Pavement Response Variable Versus Distance Plot for Given Project
Design o f Pavement Structures
Guides for Field Data Collection 111-21

Under ideal circumstances, the engineer will use a along the project, unit boundaries occur at the loca­
historic pavement data base to evaluate these factors tion where the slopes (Zc vs X) change sign Figure
Figure 3 2 illustrates how this information can be used 3 4 is a plot of the cumulative difference variable (Zc)
to determine analysis units that are characterized by a for the data shown in Figure 3 3 For this example, 11
unique combination of pavement performance factors preliminary analysis units are defined The engineer
The validity of the final units is directly related to must then evaluate the resulting length of each unit to
the accuracy of the historic pavement information determine whether two or more units should be com­
available If accurate records have been kept, this his­ bined for practical construction considerations and
torical data approach has more merit in delineating economic reasons The combination of units should be
unique units than a procedure which relies on current done relative to the sensitivity of the mean response
observations of condition or performance indicators values for each unit upon performance of future reha­
The reason for this is that changes in one or more bilitation designs
design factors (which indicate points of delineation)
Appendix J describes the mathematical back­
are not always evident through observation
ground and development of the cumulative difference
When delineating pavement analysis units, the
approach and uses the data presented in Figure 3 4 as
most difficult factor to assess (without measurement)
an example
is the subgrade (foundation) factor While records may
indicate a uniform soil subgrade, the realities of cut-
and-fill earthwork operations, variable compactive ef­
fort drainage, topographic positions, and groundwater
table positions, often alter the in situ response of sub­ 3.3 DRAINAGE SURVEY FOR
grades even along a “ uniform soil type ” REHABILITATION

M easured Pavement Response Approach. Fre­ 3.3.1 Role of Drainage in Rehabilitation

quently, the engineer cannot accurately determine the
practical extent of the performance factors noted and Distress in both rigid and flexible pavements is of­
must rely upon the analysis of a measured pavement ten either caused or accelerated by the presence of
response variable (e g , deflection) for unit delinea­ moisture in the pavement structure When designing
tion The designer should develop a plot of the mea­ pavement rehabilitation, the engineer must investigate
sured response variable as a function of the distance the role of drainage improvements in correcting de­
along the project This can be done manually or clining pavement performance It is also important to
through computerized data analysis-graphic systems recognize when a pavement’s distresses are not mois­
To illustrate this approach, Figure 3 3 is a plot of ture-related and, therefore, cannot be remedied by
friction number results, FN(40), versus station num­
drainage improvements
ber along an actual highway system While this exam­
The condition survey, an essential part of any
ple uses deflection as the pavement response variable,
rehabilitation project evaluation, will often reveal
the procedure is identical for any type of pavement
moisture-related distresses Distress types in flexible
response variable selected (i e , pavement condition,
pavement which may be caused by or accelerated by
serviceability, rut depth, etc )
moisture in the pavement structure include stripping,
Once the plot of a pavement response variable has
been generated, it may be used to delineate units rutting, depressions, fatigue cracking, and potholes
through several methods The simplest of these is Moisture-related distresses in rigid pavements include
visual examination to subjectively determine where pumping, “ D ” cracking, joint deterioration, faulting,
relatively unique units occur In addition, several ana­ and corner breaks
lytical methods are available to help delineate units, Further, the condition survey may also show that a
with the recommended procedure being the “ cumula­ pavement has suffered damage due to freezing and
tive difference” This analytical procedure, readily subsequent thawing Differential frost heave and
adaptable to computerized evaluation, relies on the spring breakup (evidence of loss of support) both indi­
simple mathematical fact that when the variable Zc cate that the pavement structure retains excess mois­
(defined as the difference between the area under the ture in the winter months In areas of the country
response curve at any distance and the total area devel­ where cycling above and below freezing occurs
oped from the overall project average response at the throughout the winter, pavements will often exhibit
same distance) is plotted as a function of distance distresses related to weakening of the support layers
111-22 Design o f Pavement Structures

Project Length

Factors
R (Rigid) F (Flex)
Pavement Type 1- 4- H
REC-5 OR-15 0 L -2 0
(Reconstr) (Original) (Overlay)
Const History
H *4- 4-* H
C1 C2 C3 C4
10pcc/6gsb 9pcc/6atb 4ac/8ctb 2acO L/3ac/12gb
Cross Section M - 4 - ------------------ 4-*- 4 - -------- *4
S1 S2
(Soil Type 1) (Soil Type 2)
Subgrade H -------------- * 4 --------
T1 T2
(Traffic Level 1) (Traffic Level 2)
Overlay Traffic H *4— H

Final Units

Unit Attributes
Unit No 1 2 3 4 5 6

Pavement type R R R F F F
Construction Hist REC-5 OR-15 OR-15 OR-15 0 L -2 0 O L-20
Cross Section C1 C2 C2 C3 C4 C4
Subgrade S1 S1 S2 S2 S2 S2
Overlay Traffic T1 T1 T1 T1 T1 T2

Figure 3.2. Idealized M ethod for Analysis Unit Delineation

 Guides fo r Field Data Collection 111-23
S N (40) - Friction Number at 40 mph

Highway Milepost

Figure 3.3. FN(40) Results Versus Distance along Project

III-24 Design o f Pavement Structures

J=
c5
uo
cu
a
0>
o
a
t-

O)
*•5
o J3
Cl
<
13 s!
S
> u
CD
$
.C
03 +2
a
P
%
>>
<*v

ef
C
V9
C
"S
Q

ro
au>
DJD

Z - Cumulative Difference Value

c
Guides for Field Data Collection 111-25

3.3.2 Assessing Need for Drainage Evaluation gional soil maps should be examined as a further
source of information on the movement of surface and
The extent of moisture-related damage in a pave­ subsurface water in the pavement area They can also
ment, as revealed by the condition survey, determines provide information about types of soil present
the commitment of time and funds to drainage evalua­ Drainage evaluation also requires investigation of
tion However, the absence of moisture-related dis­ the problem site, preferably during a wet weather
tress does not necessarily mean that a pavement is period Following is a partial list of questions to ask
without moisture-related problems, the potential for during the site investigation:
such distress may exist During the site investigation,
and even during the performance of the rehabilitation Where and how does water move across the
work, the engineer should look for deficiencies in the pavement surface?
pavement’s drainage system which might allow mois­ Where does water collect on and near the
ture to damage the pavement structure Maintenance pavement?
personnel are a good source for this type of informa­ How high is the water level in the ditches?
tion In order to select a rehabilitation approach that Do the joints and cracks contain any water?
both repairs and prevents moisture-related distress, Does water pond on the shoulder?
the engineer must understand the mechanisms by Does water-loving vegetation flourish along
which moisture causes or accelerates distress in the the roadside?
pavement Are deposits of fines or other evidence of
pumping (blowholes) visible at the
pavement’s edge?
3.3.3 Pavement History, Topography, and Do the inlets contain debris or sediment
Geometry buildup?
Are the joints and cracks sealed well?
The first step in drainage evaluation is the examina­ Site investigation should also include an inspection
tion of a pavement’s construction records For in­ to determine if drainage features planned in the
stance, what provisions were made for drainage in the original design were actually constructed Make no
original design? Further, the drainage data previously assumptions in this regard since plans are subject to
collected should be examined, as well as pavement change Also, look for evidence of in-place drain
cross sections and profiles for the following maintenance, and inquire about scheduled clean-out
longitudinal grades procedures
transverse grades
widths of pavement layers
layer thicknesses
3.3.4 Properties of Materials
cut-and-fill depths
slopes and dimensions of surface drainage
The determination of which material properties to
features (ditches, culverts, etc )
investigate depends on two factors the type of mois­
in-place subsurface drainage
ture-related distress present in the pavement, and the
If the pavement has developed moisture-related pavement layer(s) in which the distress appears Table
distress, it is obvious that the original system is inade­ 3 1 lists some of the material properties which might
quate to meet the pavement’s present needs The be investigated for each of three layers—subgrade,
drainage evaluation will reveal to the engineer granular, and surface Many county maps are availa­
whether the existing drainage system only needs to be ble that provide information about the engineering
repaired and maintained, or whether it needs to be properties of soils and should be used as a source of
augmented with additional drainage features data
The next step in drainage evaluation is the examina­ When possible, the collection of materials data for
tion of a topographic map for features influencing the both drainage evaluation and overall project evaluation
surface and subsurface movement of water in the pro­ should be coordinated For example, if coring must be
ject area Has the pavement been built in a “ bathtub,” performed to determine layer thicknesses, samples of
with no lower ground for the water to drain to? Are subgrade soil can be taken at the same time for drain-
there any lakes, streams, or seasonally wet areas age-related testing In this way, drainage evaluation
above the elevation of the pavement? In addition, re­ expenses will be minimized
III-26 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 3.1. M aterial P roperties Associated w ith D rainage Problem s

in Pavements
Subgrade
General categorization: gradation
classification
Weight-volume relationships optimum lab dry density
optimum lab moisture content
in situ dry density
in situ moisture content
Other drainage-related characteristics permeability
effective porosity
frost susceptibility
capillarity
G ran u lar Layers
General categorization gradation
percent fines
Atterberg limits
classification
optimum lab moisture content
in situ dry density
in situ moisture content
Other drainage-related characteristics permeability
effective porosity
frost susceptibility
capillarity
Surface
Aggregate “ D ” cracking susceptibility
freeze-thaw susceptibility
stripping
Aggregate reaction

3.3.5 C lim atic Zones The three temperature regions are:

The United States can be divided into nine regional Region A —Severe winters with a high poten­
climatic zones which are formed by the intersection of tial for frost penetration to appreciable
three moisture regions and three temperature regions depths into the subgrade
Figure 3 5 illustrates the nine climatic zones The Region B —Freeze-thaw cycles in the surface
three moisture regions are: and base Severe winters may produce fro­
zen subgrades, but long-term freezing prob­
Region / —High potential for moisture lems are minor
presence in the entire pavement structure Region C —Low temperatures are not a prob­
lem Stability at high temperature should be
throughout the year
considered
Region / / —Seasonal variability of moisture
in the pavement structure Pavements within a given climatic zone typically ex­
Region / / / —Very little moisture in the hibit similarities in performance, moisture-related dis­
pavement structure during the year tress, and drainage-related rehabilitation work required
 Guides for Field Data Collection

Figure 3.5. Climatic Zones Based on Thornthwaite Potential Evaporation and Moisture Index and Their Interaction
with Performance, with Similar Performance Expected in Similar Climatic Regions
111-27
111-28 Design o f Pavement Structures

3.3.6 Sum m ary 3.4.2 Minimum Information Needs

Only when the engineer recognizes a pavement’s When pavement condition surveys are conducted,
moisture-related problems and understands how they there is a minimum information requirement neces­
developed can he or she design rehabilitation alterna­ sary if the engineer is to make knowledgeable deci­
tives which address the problems and prevent their sions regarding rehabilitation needs and strategies
recurrence To increase the economics of the drainage These information requirements are
survey process, every effort should be made to de­ (1) Distress Type—Identify types of physical dis­
velop drainage rehabilitation alternatives which are tress existing in the pavement The distress
compatible with alternatives being considered for the types should be placed in categories according
correction of other pavement distresses present to their casual mechanisms
(2) Distress Severity—Note level of severity for
each distress type present to assess degree of
deterioration
3.4 CONDITION (DISTRESS) SURVEY (3) Distress Amount—Denote relative area (per­
centage of the project) affected by each combi­
3.4.1 General Background nation of distress type and severity
A technically sound engineering condition survey
Accurate condition surveys which assess a pave­ must address each one of these needs, although the
m ent’s physical distress are vital to a successful reha­ parameters of each category may vary from agency to
bilitation effort Condition survey results, together agency Appendix C provides example distress-type
with serviceability (roughness), drainage, and struc­ descriptions and associated severity groups that may
tural evaluation surveys, provide the engineer with the be used as a guide for developing or modifying condi­
necessary information to develop a sound rehabilita­ tion (distress) surveys for an agency
tion strategy Thus, an intensive survey is mandatory
before any rehabilitation designs are attempted
In addition, it is important that condition surveys 3.4.3 Utilization of Information
be conducted after new construction or rehabilitation
work Such monitoring is a tool for network assess­ A thorough condition survey is an invaluable tool
ment and provides information regarding the rate of in the rehabilitation process If properly conducted,
the condition survey identifies distress types present
distress buildup These survey results are a major in­
which, in turn, assists the engineer in defining proba­
put when determining whether to undertake a major
ble causes of the distress Only with the proper identi­
rehabilitation project However, when a rehabilitation
fication of probable cause(s) is it possible to select
project is planned, the use of these periodic condition
the rehabilitation strategy (overlay or nonoverlay) that
survey results are insufficient to properly evaluate the
will both repair and prevent the problem As previ­
necessary rehabilitation steps and the intensive survey,
ously noted, not all pavement distress is traceable to
as mentioned above, is vital structural mechanisms, factors such as climate, con­
While engineers accept the necessity for condition struction quality, etc , may also interact in a complex
or distress surveys in broad terms, specific methodo­ way to cause pavement distress Furthermore, many
logies for such surveys vary from agency to agency observed distresses may be a function of several
Each agency must develop a survey approach consist­ mechanisms Tables 3 2, 3 3, and 3 4 categorize
ent with its use of the data generated, as well as its pavement distress relative to probable cause for flexi­
available manpower and financial resources ble (asphalt), jointed concrete, and continuously rein­
Several agencies have expanded the condition sur­ forced pavement systems
vey concept and combined all of the recorded distress In addition to identifying probable causes of dis­
information into a single “ condition index” which tress, a properly conducted condition survey will doc­
measures overall pavement condition and probable ument the location and severity of the distress types
required maintenance This approach is encouraged This then indicates the necessity for restoration, if
because it provides an additional engineering tool that any Furthermore, the condition survey provides a
greatly aids in the overall rehabilitation planning permanent record of the pavement condition at the
effort at both project and network levels time of the survey From this, significant deviations in
Guides fo r Field Data Collection 111-29

Table 3.2. G eneral Categorization of Asphalt Pavement Distress

Primarily Primarily
Traffic Load Climate/Materials
Distress Type Caused Caused
1 Alligator or fatigue cracking X
2 Bleeding X
3 Block cracking X
4 Corrugation X
5 Depression X
6 Joint reflection cracking from PCC slab X
7 Lane/shoulder dropoff or heave X
8 Lane/shoulder separation X
9 Longitudinal and transverse cracking X
10 Patch deterioration X
11 Polished aggregate X
12 Potholes X
13 Pumping and water bleeding X(M,H) X(L)
14 Raveling and weathering X
15 Rutting X
16 Slippage cracking X
17 Swell X

Table 3.3. General Categorization of Jointed Concrete Pavement Distress

Primarily Primarily
Traffic Load Climate/Materials
Distress Type Caused Caused
1 Blow-up X
2 Corner break X
3 Depression X
4 Durability “ D ” cracking X
5 Faulting of transverse joints and cracks X
6 Joint load transfer associated distress X X
7 Joint seal damage of transverse joints X
8 Lane/shoulder dropoff or heave X
9 Lane/shoulder joint separation X
10 Longitudinal cracks X
11 Longitudinal joint faulting X X
12 Patch deterioration X(M,H) X(L)
13 Patch adjacent slab deterioration X X
14 Popouts X
15 Pumping and water bleeding X(M,H) X(L)
16 Reactive aggregate durability distress X
17 Scaling, map cracking and crazing X
18 Spalling (transverse and longitudinal joints) X(M,H) X (L,M ,H)
19 Spalling (corner) X
20 Swell X
21 Transverse and diagonal cracks X(L,M ,H) X(L)
Ill-30 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 3.4. G eneral C ategorization of Continuously Reinforced C oncrete Pavement Distress

Primarily Primarily
Traffic Load Climate/Materials
Distress Type Caused Caused
1 Asphalt patch deterioration X
2 Blow-up X
3 Concrete patch deterioration X(M,H) X(L)
4 Construction joint distress X
5 Depression X
6 Durability “ D ” cracking X
7 Edge punchout X
8 Lane/shoulder dropoff or heave X
9 Lane/shoulder joint separation X
10 Localized distress X
11 Longitudinal cracking X
12 Longitudinal joint faulting X X
13 Patch adjacent slab deterioration X X
14 Popouts X
15 Pumping and water bleeding X(M,H) X(L)
16 Reactive aggregate distress X
17 Scaling, map cracking and crazing X
18 Spalling X X
19 Swell X
20 Transverse cracking X(M,H) X(L,M)

condition can be easily assessed along the entire the structural evaluation and rehabilitation process for
project length Also, differences between lanes of a many decades In its earliest applications, the total
multi-lane pavement facility will be revealed The measured pavement deflection under a particular load
presence of distress, as indicated by a condition sur­ arrangement was used as a direct indicator of struc­
vey, indicates a decline in pavement serviceability, and tural capacity Several agencies developed failure cri­
more detailed field evaluations should be considered teria, particularly for flexible pavements, that related
In summary, it is again emphasized that periodic the maximum measured deflection to the number of
condition surveys provide the engineer with the capa­ allowable load repetitions
bility to assess impending distress and estimate the Such criteria have been, and still are, used for the
probable rate of future pavement deterioration Thus, design of both new pavement systems and structural
recognition of the initial stages of rigid pavement overlay systems As experience with this approach
pumping, for example, may allow nonoverlay rehabili­ grew, more accurate performance relationships were
tation approaches to be used as compared to the costly obtained by using only the “ rebound,” “ recoverable,”
rehabilitation of slab fracture, faulting, and joint dam­ or “ elastic” portion of the deflection as the key indi­
age A more extensive condition survey is essential cator of performance, rather than the total deflection
when embarking on a major rehabilitation project so under load A typical deflection criterion (using a
that the best and most economic solution may be Benkleman Beam) is shown in Figure 3 6 For many
achieved years, the Asphalt Institute has used this criterion as
the basis for the structural overlay analysis of flexible
overlays over existing flexible pavements
3 .5 NDT DEFLECTION MEASUREMENT
While deflection criteria similar to that shown in
Figure 3 6 are in common use, recent technical ad­
3.5.1 Overview
vances indicate that maximum rebound (elastic) de­
Deflection Interpretation. The use of nondes­ flection, by itself, is not the most accurate nor
tructive deflection testing has been an integral part of applicable parameter for the variety of pavement
Guides for Field Data Collection 111-31

Design Rebound Deflection, MM

o o
o o q
in o in o
o 8
in
S 88 8 £ O8
c j CJ — — O
n o in o
CM‘S — ~
O O O o
o o
o
C J CM — — cf
1------ I I T o
-p -1" o
8~

o
o
o
o
o
o
o

8
o
g-
o

EAL
o
o

o
o
o

111 I I I I 11 I I I I 11111 I
CJ CM
o 00 <0 CJ —oo oo s o o
- d o o o o o 6 o o
d o o o o o o

Design Rebound Deflection, Inches

Figure 3.6. Design R ebound Deflection C hart

111-32 Design o f Pavement Structures

structures encountered in practice In reality, all pave­ larger than average mixture conditions in the unbound
ments may be structurally distressed by either exces­ pavement layers This is illustrated by Figure 3 9
sive deformations and/or load-associated fracture of a Procedures for use in adjusting NDT deflection
particular stabilized layer While the maximum elastic measurements are uniquely dependent upon the spe­
deflection may be more indicative of the pavement’s cific NDT deflection methodology introduced later in
ability to resist repetitive shear displacements leading this section Detailed steps to adjust for environmental
to rutting, the curvature radius of the pavement under conditions are presented for each of two recom­
load is more indicative of overall resistance to re­ mended approaches in Chapter 5
peated load fracture of stabilized pavement layers
As a result, several agencies have refined deflec-
Deflection M easuring Systems. Several NDT
tion-repetition-performance criteria to account for this
deflection measuring systems are available for use in
very important concept Figures 3 7 and 3 8 indicate
pavement evaluation work In general, systems can be
two such criteria from leading agencies which clearly
categorized into five major groups:
demonstrate that no single deflection criterion is ap­
plicable for all flexible or semi-rigid pavement sys­
Static-Creep Deflection Methods
tems In essence, these figures illustrate the following
Automated Deflection Beams
fundamental principles of deflection testing: (1) multi­
Steady State (Sinusoidal) Deflection Devices
ple structural distress types (deformation and fracture)
Impulse Devices
must be logically accounted for in the interpretation of Wave Propagation Devices
deflection testing results; and (2) pavement layer
material type (quality) and layer thickness also must The latter three measuring systems use “ dynamic’,’
be considered if deflection-repetition-performance deflection equipment to exert loads (stress forms) of
curves are to be used short duration and, thus, simulate to variable degrees
In summary, the most accurate assessment of pave­ the dynamic stress conditions caused by moving wheel
ment performance is achieved through the use of max­ loads At present, wave propagation approaches are
imum elastic deflection in combination with an primarily experimental and are not considered as cur­
indicator of the radius of curvature of the pavement rent “production” -oriented NDT field devices
under load In this Guide, the NDT deflection pave­
ment structural capacity method requires the use of
deflection basin measurements under load, rather than
maximum deflections alone The details, use, and in­ 3.5.2 Uses of NDT Deflection Results
terpretation of this fundamental approach are pre­
sented in this section This Guide presents procedures to utilize non­
destructive deflection testing results in terms of three
Environmental Adjustments. When deflection factors They are
measurements are taken on an asphalt pavement, the
results must be corrected (standardized) to a particular (1) evaluation of the in situ structural capacity of
type of loading system (vehicle or NDT device) and the pavement
normalized to an arbitrarily defined set of environ­ (2) rigid pavement joint/load transfer analysis
mental conditions In general, measured deflections (3) rigid pavement slab-void detection
must be adjusted to a reference pavement temperature
(usually 70 °F) to account for the effect of this variable Without question, NDT deflection data are primarily
upon asphaltic-stabilized material modulus This fac­ associated with the first category, the in situ or
tor significantly affects the interpretation of flexible “ effective” pavement structural capacity Two ap­
pavement deflections Because deflection testing is proaches for using NDT data in this regard are pre­
generally conducted at a particular time of year, the sented in the next section and discussed in detail in
engineer must make a deflection adjustment to ensure Chapter 5 While methodologies may differ, both ap­
that the most critical moisture regime, within a typical proaches use deflection basin measurement (rather
year, is used in the analysis In areas subject to frost than maximum deflection only) to evaluate structural
penetration into the pavement, this time is always as­ capacity In addition, both methods rely on dynamic
sociated with the spring thaw For pavements not expe­ deflections as indicative of performance rather than
riencing frost, the critical deflection period is a direct static-creep deflection response Thus, data used to
function of when the pavement is weakened due to evaluate the in situ structural capacity of a pavement
Guides for Field Data Collection 111-33

3 7a

3 7b

Cumulative Standard Axles (x 10 6)

3 7c
Figure 3.7. Deflection—Life Relationships for Various Pavement Types (Lister and Kennedy—TRRL)
 111-34 Design o f Pavement Structures

Traffic Index (1964 Design Procedure)

Deflection (0.001 inches)

Equivalent 5000 lb Wheel Loads (E W L ) Millions

Figure 3.8. Deflection—Life Relationship for Asphaltic Pavements

(California Method of Overlay Design)

TIM E

Figure 3.9. Illustration of the Effect o f Geographic Location on Seasonal Variations in Deflections
Guides for Field Data Collection 111-35

must be gathered from either steady state or impulse there exists an ideal minimum distance for each pave­
devices, according to guidelines presented herein ment type—NDT device combination where the outer
Relative to the use of NDT for joint/load transfer geophone should be placed to ensure that the deflec­
studies and slab-void detection, any deflection device tion response is not being influenced by upper pave­
may be employed with the stipulation that the deflec­ ment layers If the outer geophone is placed beyond
tion equipment meet certain requirements, to be noted this point, predictive estimation errors in the subgrade
herein However, only dynamic NDT devices (steady support or response will occur Detailed guidance for
state vibratory and impulse) can be used with confi­ optimum placement of the outer geophone in NDT
dence in evaluating all three factors listed above evaluation is presented in Chapter 5
Both procedures for determining effective struc­
tural capacity use deflection basin measurements to
3.5.3 Evaluating the Effective evaluate subgrade modulus, as described above It is
Structural Capacity in the ensuing steps of structural capacity evaluation
that the methods differ
General Approaches. Evaluation of the effective The objective of the Pavement Layer Moduli Pre­
structural capacity of a pavement, as set forth in this diction Technique is to back calculate, from the mea­
Guide, requires the use of dynamic (steady state sured deflection basin results, all of the in situ-layered
vibratory or impulse) loads, and the subsequent mea­ elastic moduli The fundamental premise of this solu­
surement of the deflection basin Then, using the mea­ tion is that a unique set of layer moduli exist such that
sured deflection basin, the in situ subgrade modulus is the theoretically predicted deflection basin (using
estimated Within this context, two procedures are multi-layer theory and the special load characteristics
available to carry out this evaluation They are: of the NDT device) is equivalent to the measured de­
flection basin The general applicability of this ap­
(1) pavement layer moduli prediction technique
proach can be visualized by referring to Figure 3 10
(2) direct structural capacity prediction technique
If one views the intersection of the stress zone at the
While both approaches yield the same value (effective interface of the surface and base/subbase course, the
structural capacity, SCxeff), the user should be aware measured surface deflection at this radial offset value
of the advantages and disadvantages of each when must logically be influenced only by the layer moduli
making a selection between the two of the base/subbase and subgrade layer Because the
Figure 3 10 is a schematic diagram of a typical subgrade modulus has been determined already, the
pavement structure being deflected under a dynamic deflection at this interface/intersection location can be
NDT load As the load is applied (either steady state used to determine the modulus of the base/subbase
or impulse), it spreads through a portion of the pave­ layer This is the fundamental concept in deflection
ment system, as represented by the conical zone in the basin analysis when estimating the in situ layer
figure The incline of the sides of this zone, which moduli In short, the solution initiates at the outer
varies from layer to layer, is related to the relative geophone locations (edge of the deflection basin) to
stiffness or modulus of the material within each layer determine the moduli of the lowest pavement layer
As the modulus increases (material becomes stiffer), The sequence progresses by using this “ known”
the stress is spread over a much larger area material response and deflections at radial offsets ap­
This figure reveals several interesting concepts in proaching the load plate center In this approach, the
NDT pavement analysis Of significance is the radial values of the thickness, hh and Poisson ratio, Uj, must
distance (r = a3e) in which the stress zone intersects either be known or assumed This solution is applica­
the interface of the subbase and subgrade layers ble to pavement types of all rigidities (flexible to
When the deflection basin is measured (via geophones rigid) Knowledge of the individual properties (i e ,
or other measurement devices), any surface deflection modulus) allows for layer coefficients to be estab­
obtained at or beyond the a3e value is due only to lished using the principles found in Part II of the
stresses (deformations) within the subgrade itself Guide to predict the effective structural capacity (i e ,
Thus, the outer readings of deflection basin, under effective Structural Number or effective PCC Thick­
dynamic load, primarily reflect the in situ modulus ness) of the existing pavement
properties of the lower (subgrade) soil This is the The second alternative, the Direct Structural Ca­
fundamental concept used in either approach to estab­ pacity Prediction Technique, employs the fact that the
lish the value of the pavement support condition from combined stiffness influence of each layer thickness-
NDT evaluation Equally important is the fact that modulus (thickness-layer coefficient) determines the
 III-36

Figure 3.10. Schematic of Stress Zone within Pavement Structure under the FWD Load
Design o f Pavement Structures
Guides for Field Data Collection 111-37

overall structural capacity of the pavement Thus, the One final consideration of this approach (particu­
maximum NDT deflection (at the load center) may be larly the Pavement Layer Moduli Prediction Tech­
viewed as the result of two separate pavement parame­ nique) is the fact that the estimated in situ layer moduli
ters: (1) structural capacity, and (2) subgrade modu­ can be used as direct input into the more mechanistic
lus This approach recognizes that structural capacity design overlay approaches presented in Part IV and
is a function of the maximum NDT deflection and Appendix CC of the Guide This may be beneficial to
subgrade modulus Hence, this technique relies on agencies that want to conduct more in-depth rehabili­
outer deflection values to estimate the subgrade modu­ tation studies
lus (support), and the maximum measured NDT de­
flection to predict the “ effective” structural pavement N D T Equipm ent Considerations. As previously
capacity Detailed procedures for this approach are noted, the two NDT methodologies to evaluate the
contained in Chapter 5 effective structural capacity of pavements are consid­
ered applicable to any type of dynamic NDT device
State o f the Art. The dynamic NDT-deflection Certain fundamentals should be considered by the en­
basin methodologies presented and recommended for gineer when selecting an NDT device They are as
overlay rehabilitation studies are a technical improve­ follows:
ment over approaches that use only a unique deflec­
tion-life performance criterion While present state of (1) An NDT device that rapidly measures variable
the art methods are thought to be technically sound, load magnitudes at a given location (test point)
the engineer must recognize that they are not perfect, is desirable The assessment of deflections
nor above future modifications as technology and use under various load levels is useful when non­
linear material response is required and during
advances Furthermore, the engineer must not blindly
use NDT results, but rather assess the reasonableness rigid pavement-void detection studies (See
Section 3 5 5 )
of any results obtained If there are excessive differ­
(2) The ability of an NDT device to use dynamic
ences between NDT-derived estimates and previous
loads approaching actual truck loads is impor­
agency experience of how local materials behave, an
tant for several reasons First, for pavement
in-depth reevaluation is necessary to clarify the cause
materials that may exhibit nonlinear behavior
of the difference
(particularly unbound granular and subgrade
The use of dynamic NDT deflection basin tech­
soils), analysis of pavements with 8-kip to
niques provides the user with broad powers in evaluat­
10-kip loads results in moduli/capacity pre­
ing pavements One such power is the ability to
dictions representative of pavement response
estimate the in situ support value of the subgrade This
under truck traffic In addition, with the
factor is vital to the completion of an accurate overlay
deeper deflection zone caused by larger dy­
analysis namic loads, additional weaknesses in the
Another capability of the prediction techniques pavement structure may be located Finally,
presented here and in Chapter 5 is the ability to accu­ larger dynamic loads examine larger surface/
rately determine the in situ or effective capacity of the radial locations
existing pavement at the time of measurement to carry (3) The NDT device should routinely place the
load repetitions Areas of pavement weakness will be deflection sensors at an effective radial dis­
recognized by both dynamic NDT processes presented tance from the load center (See Chapter 5 for
herein For instance, cracking of pavement layers will guidance)
manifest itself by an increase in deflection which, in (4) In general, the NDT device should have a min­
turn, results in lower predicted layer moduli and/or a imum of three or, preferably, four deflection
subsequent reduction in the pavement’s load capacity sensors Please note that six sensors are not
Also, the impact of moisture increases will be re­ twice as effective as three sensors The actual
flected in a change in the deflection basin response number of sensors placed depends on the ana­
of the pavement, as will the influence of the as- lytical approach used during evaluation
constructed/in situ material behavior In summary, (5) Whenever practical, the placement of sensors
NDT deflection basin analysis is a technique for deter­ should correspond with the interface intersec­
mining the most accurate estimates of the actual in situ tions of stress zones, as noted in Figure 3 10
layer properties which collectively define the overall This procedure reminds NDT users that the
structural capacity of the pavement system optimal sensor layout for one pavement may
111-38 Design o f Pavement Structures

not be the best layout for another pavement Je = 100/(100 + Sje )

This detail should be considered on a project-
by-project basis
The Je value is a stress modification factor applied to
the theoretically computed free edge slab stress, based
upon Westergaard analysis, and yields the actual edge
3.5.4 Joint Load Transfer Analysis
(joint) stress in the slab due to a given level of load
transfer efficiency Thus,
Background. In addition to structural capacity
evaluation, nondestructive deflection testing can be
used to evaluate the in situ load transfer capacity of Sact J c (S fc )
rigid pavement joints (as well as cracked slabs). With
NDT, the engineer can evaluate the actual perform­
ance of joints in the field relative to their expected where
performance in the design phase
The load size transferred across a rigid pavement sact = the actual slab stress at the edge (joint),
joint directly impacts the flexural slab stress at or near Sfe = the theoretically computed free edge
the joint Load transfer capability is measured by the stress, and
joint efficiency which is commonly expressed in one Je = the stress modification factor
of two ways: (1) deflection efficiency, and (2) stress
efficiency Because the Je value is related to the joint stress
Joint load transfer efficiency, dje, based on deflec­ efficiency value, which in turn is related to the joint
tions is represented by deflection efficiency value, the Je value (and hence
actual-modified free edge stress at a joint) can be de­
termined directly from the dje parameter obtained with
dje = du/d, X 100 NDT The analysis should not, however, be applied to
joints (edges) where the NDT load device is in the
In this equation, du is the deflection at the joint of the immediate vicinity of a slab corner
unloaded slab, while d, is the deflection of the loaded Testing should be avoided during midday to mini­
slab The dje value, determined by deflection ratios of mize the possibility of joint lockup and slab curl On
adjacent slabs, directly lends itself to NDT, wherein cool overcast days, deflection may be performed
deflection sensors may be placed on each slab close to throughout the day
the joint The NDT load plate is also positioned on
one of the slabs near the joint Figure 3 11 illustrates Procedure. All NDT deflection devices are suit­
two extreme cases, a joint with excellent load transfer able for evaluating the load transfer efficiency at any
and a joint with no load transfer Joint deflection joint or crack, provided deflection sensors can be
efficiency values may range from 0 percent (none) or placed close enough to each other across the joint to
100 percent (full) measure displacement of both the loaded and un­
Joint load transfer efficiency, based upon stress, sje, loaded slabs A load approaching 9,000 pounds is
is represented by: preferred because it simulates stress deformations as­
sociated with an 18 KSAL
Once unloaded and loaded slab (joint) deflections
Sje = Su X Sj X 100
are measured, the dje value can be directly deter­
mined Figure 3 12 may then be used to determine the
In this equation, su and S) refer to stresses in the un­ Sje (stress) efficiency value, from which Je (stress mod­
loaded and loaded slabs, respectively Studies indicate ification factor) may be computed Also, predicted in
that there is not a one-to-one relationship between situ joint slab stress may be estimated from the theo­
deflection efficiency and stress efficiency Figure 3 12 retical free edge stress (only necessary if the stress
depicts the relationship between these two joint effi­ parameter is to be used in the rehabilitation process)
ciency parameters As an example, assume that the NDT load transfer
In the structural evaluation of rigid pavement slab evaluation of a joint produced these results: joint de­
systems, the stress modification factor, Je, may also be flection on the loaded slab, de, is 0 030 inches, and
of interest This factor is related to the stress effi­ joint deflection on the unloaded slab, du, is 0 018
ciency (joint) parameter by: inches For the pavement (slab-foundation) system, a
Guides for Field Data Collection 111-39

Poor Load Transfer = 0 000 = 0

0 040

Load

Good Load Transfer = 0 020 = 1 00

0 020

Figure 3.11. Illustration of Poor and Good Load Transfer

III-40 Design o f Pavement Structures
x 100)
=
Stress Efficiency (STE

Deflection Efficiency (DTE = x 100) — %

Figure 3.12. Relationship Between Joint Efficiency For Flexural Stress and Deflection Methods of
Measurement. (By L. Korbus and E.J. Barenberg: From DOT/FAA/RD-7914, IV),
“Longitudinal Joint Systems in Slip-Formed Rigid Pavements—Volume IV.”
Guides fo r Field Data Collection 111-41

theoretical free edge stress of sfe = 525 psi was and quantity of joints to be tested; this is left to the
analytically computed discretion of the engineer upon conducting a visual
From this data, dje (deflection efficiency) is com­ field survey
puted: Presented here are three methods for slab void de­
tection They are:
dje = (0 018/0 030) X 100 (1) Corner Deflection Profile (approximate)
= 60 0 percent (2) Variable Load Corner Deflection Analysis
(3) Void Size Estimation Procedure
Using Figure 3 12, the joint stress efficiency value, Each successive method of void detection is increas­
Sje, is ingly detailed

Sje = 25 7 percent (26%) C om er Deflection Profile (Approximate) This

method of void detection requires the measurement of
Then, the stress modification factor, Je, is corner deflection under a constant load (preferably 9
kips) along a section of pavement The approach-and-
leave corner deflections are then plotted on a profile
Je = 100/(100 + 25 7) and the results inspected for corners with the lowest
- 795 deflections, as these corners will likely have full
support (See Figure 3 13 ) Typically, the approach
corner has little or no void A maximum allowable
Finally, the estimated actual (in situ) slab stress at the deflection value, somewhat larger than the apparent
joint, sact, would be full support or no-void value, can then be selected and
used as a “ field-generated criteria” for corners that
sact = 795(525) may require subsealing (deflection higher than this
maximum allowable value) For example, the deflec­
= 418 psi tion measurements in Figure 3 13 taken on a doweled
JRCP with a Falling Weight Deflectometer show ap­
In theory, the minimum value of Je equals 0 50 (as proximately 0 020 inches to be a reasonable maxi­
dje approaches 100 0 percent) and the maximum value mum deflection The measurements in Figure 3 14,
of Je equals 1 00 (as dje approaches 0 percent or a pure taken on an undoweled JPCP with a weight truck,
free edge-no load transfer condition) show 0 015 inches to be a reasonable maximum de­
flection A deflection profile for CRCP is shown in
Figure 3 15 Here agin, high deflections identify loss
3.5.5 Use in Slab-Void Detection of support or void areas
If subsealing is undertaken, the deflection at each
Background. The third primary use of non­ subsealed location should be measured with the same
destructive deflection testing is the detection of voids device and weight used prior to subsealing, and as
under joint/crack systems in rigid pavements In addi­ close to the same temperature as possible Any corner
tion, a method exists for estimating the approximate experiencing deflections in excess of the selected
size of voids, which is vital information during slab maximum value should be subsealed again The
subsealing rehabilitation work (with or without proportion of slab corners having greater deflections
planned overlay) This nonoverlay method is dis­ than the maximum allowable deflection can then be
cussed in Section 4 3 4 computed This proportion is used in estimating mate­
Higher midday temperatures should be avoided rial quantities
during deflection testing to minimize the possibility of One shortcoming of the corner deflection profile
joint lockup and slab curl On cool overcast days, method is that a single value for the maximum allowa­
deflection testing may be performed throughout the ble deflection may not be appropriate if load transfer
day The pattern of testing depends on the method of varies widely from joint to joint Because of this and
void detection used It is recommended that a deflec­ the influence of test temperature upon results, this
tion device capable of simulating heavy truck loads be method, though extremely useful, should be viewed as
used There are no standards in terms of the location an approximate approach to void detection Also, the
111-42 Design o f Pavement Structures

CL LO
CN
V
<r

O
CN

Profile of Corner Deflection for JRCP (60 ft. joint space)

O
a.
CD
C
o

c
5

0
c
o
(J
0>
T
O
0
Figure 3.13.

s o
CO

FWD Corner Deflection x 10'3 ins

 Guides for Field Data Collection

g.O l X SUj - UO!108|J9Q 3|*V s

Figure 3.14. 18-Kip Single Axle Corner Deflection Profile of Slab Corners (non-doweled, 20 ft. space)
111-43
 HI-44

o
oo

( U ! e.0L)
i"
<0

uojjoaipa
in
Figure 3.15. Deflection Profile of CRCP at each Crack Showing Void Locations
Design o f Pavement Structures
Guides fo r Field Data Collection 111-45

results give no indication of the probable size of voids 3.6 FIELD SAMPLING AND
that may be presented TESTING PROGRAMS

Variable Load C om er Deflection Analysis. This 3.6.1 Test Types

rapid method of void detection may be used while
deflection testing is in progress Corner deflections In general, field testing is categorized into two
broad areas: nondestructive testing (NDT) and de­
are measured at three load levels (e g , 6, 9, 12 kips)
structive testing Destructive tests require the physical
to establish the load vs deflection response for each
removal of pavement layer material in order to obtain a
test location (See Figures 3 16 and 3 17) Typically,
sample (either disturbed or undisturbed) or to conduct
locations with no voids cross the deflection axis very
an in-place test Such testing has many disadvantages
near the origin (less than or equal to 002 in ) For
and limitations, particularly when conducted on mod­
locations where the load vs deflection response
erate to heavily trafficked highway systems Practical
crosses the axis at points further removed from the restraints in terms of time and money severely limit
origin, voids are indicated Due to variations in joint the number and variety of destructive tests conducted
load transfer which affects the load vs deflection re­ on routine rehabilitation studies
sponse, this method cannot be used to establish the Nondestructive testing, on the other hand, does not
approximate size of the void However, the percentage necessitate physical disturbance of the pavement and,
of joints having voids may be computed and, thus, as a result, is preferred for the rehabilitation process
indicate the number of joints which will need subseal­ The most widely used form of NDT is associated with
ing The effects of subsealing at locations where voids the field deflection tests noted in the previous section
are suspected is demonstrated in Figure 3 17 However, several additional forms of NDT are now
state of the art technologies The other major type of
Void Size Estimation Procedures. A procedure NDT is associated with layer thickness measurements
was developed in NCHRP Project 1-21 to estimate the and void detection under rigid pavement systems
approximate void area under a given slab corner The While these tests are not, at present, a part of the
procedure requires a 5 + kip plate load (preferably routine field testing program, future improvements
9 kips), and the ability to measure (and interpret) de­ and advances will undoubtedly occur Because of the
flection basins at the slab center, deflection at the slab very significant advantages of nondestructive testing
corner, and transverse joint load transfer Center slab over destructive testing, the engineer should contin­
basin testing results are used to standardize the mea­ ually keep abreast of changes in this technology
sured corner deflections (deflection from 9,000-lb
plate load at E = 4,000,000 psi) and the measured
3.6.2 Major Parameters
load transfer (Refer to NCHRP 1-21 for details )
All standardized corner deflections are then en­
During the data collection process, the engineer
tered on a void detection plot according to the adjusted
must accumulate enough information on the in-place
load transfer (See Figure 3 1 8 ) Deflections plotted in
condition of the pavement system to determine the
the “ zero voids band” indicate joints without voids
precise cause of the distress The parameters of the
Based on the location of this band, deflection levels actual data collected will vary from project to project
for all possible load transfer conditions are deter­ To illustrate, if a flexible pavement is experiencing
mined to indicate varying void sizes (4-72 sq ft of extensive rutting after 15 to 20 years of service, the
surface area) Points of deflection falling outside the rehabilitation required is probably routine, and a min­
zero voids band are then used to determine the approx­ imum field sampling and testing program will proba­
imate size and location of voids (in square feet of bly suffice On the other hand, if a flexible pavement
surface area) at each joint is experiencing extensive rutting after only a few years
Typically, voids can be located on one or both sides in service, more extensive field testing and data col­
of the joint using this method Subsealing should be lection may be necessary to pinpoint the exact cause of
performed only at locations where voids exist, with the distress and the appropriate rehabilitation mea­
the undersealing hole pattern being adjusted according sures Such rutting may be the result of material
to the size of the void The total area of voids can be densification (improper compaction), deformation in
extrapolated over the project and utilized to estimate the foundation (subgrade), instability in the asphalt
material quantities by comparison with other projects layer, etc
 111-46

E0 l * sq| - peoq QMd

Figure 3.16. Joint Load Deflection (leave side) with Various Sizes of Suspected Voids (1-77 Ohio)
Design o f Pavement Structures
 Guides fo r Field Data Collection

e0 l x
sqi - peoq
qmj
Figure 3.17. Joint Load Deflection where Large Void under Leave Corner was Suspected (Ohio 1-77)
111-47
111-48 Design o f Pavement Structures

Typical Void Detection Plot for Determining Void Size and Location
Figure 3.18.

(sd|>| 8 IB s||/\|) uopaaijaQ jauioo pazjpjepueig

Guides fo r Field Data Collection III-49

It is the responsibility of the engineer to determine In summary, while NDT is largely preferred to de­
the scope of the data collection process for a project, structive testing, a technically sound engineering field
and to minimize the cost of the process by avoiding the program should include a complementary destructive
collection of superfluous information There are, test program to ensure the accuracy of data obtained
however, several major parameters that should be This system of double checking ensures that inaccu­
viewed as mandatory in any data collection process rate data will not be used in the rehabilitation design
They are as follows:

Pavement Deflection Response

3.6.4 Selecting the Required Number of Tests
In Situ Material Response (Modulus, Strength)
Layer Thicknesses
Analysis Unit. While conducting a pavement
Layer Material Type
analysis, the project length should be divided into
analysis units These are pavement segments which
exhibit statistically uniform attributes and perform­
ance These units, which are discussed further in
3.6.3 Necessity for Destructive Testing
Chapter 5 and Appendix J, form the basis for a field
sampling and testing program As shown in Figure
There are three sources of information available to
3 1, a certain degree of variability (associated with
the engineer during the data collection process:
any parameter) exists within each unit In addition to
historic data, destructive testing, and nondestructive
its importance from a design reliability viewpoint, this
testing One or more of these sources may be used to
“ within unit” variability is helpful in defining a statis­
fulfill the data collection parameters listed above
tically based sampling and testing program
While the emphasis thus far has been on nondestruc­
tive testing, destructive testing may play a vital role in
Lim it o f Accuracy Curves. Tests conducted on
field sampling and testing
analysis units provide an estimate of the actual mean
In fulfilling the second parameter, in situ material
and standard deviation (or variance) of the property
response, NDT is the preferred source of information
under investigation As the number of tests increases,
However, historic data may be used with the caution
the estimated values more closely approximate true
that in situ conditions may have altered since the data
values The principles of statistical confidence levels
was gathered The use of a limited number of destruc­
are very useful in determining how many tests will be
tive tests to verify/modify material properties esti­
necessary to ensure that the estimated mean is within a
mated from either NDT or historic data is sound
certain limit of the actual mean The concept of confi­
engineering practice worthy of consideration Also,
dence levels may be explained by the statement that we
these tests may be used to determine drainage condi­
are 100(1 — a) percent confident that the mean (true)
tions and identify problem layers Test pits may also
value lies within the limits calculated
be of use in this area
Statistical limit of accuracy curves help assess the
For rigid pavements, one of the more significant
impact of the number of tests conducted on the preci­
material properties influencing performance is the
sion of the estimate The limit of accuracy, R, repre­
flexural strength (modulus of rupture) of the concrete
sents the probable range of the true mean from the
General correlations between splitting tensile strength
average obtained by “ n” tests, at a given degree of
and flexural strength may be used as a source of input
confidence (e g , 95 percent) Mathematically,
since cores can be obtained from the pavement
Unlike the first two parameters, determination of
pavement layer thicknesses and layer material type R = Ka(ofy/n)
cannot be made through NDT While historic infor­
mation may be available, the extreme importance and
sensitivity of this variable calls for the use of destruc­ where
tive testing to verify/modify the available historic
information Layer material type can usually be iden­ Ka = the standardized normal deviate, which is
tified from historic pavement information, unless a function of the desired confidence level,
special circumstances dictate otherwise A limited 100(1 — a), and
amount of coring at randomly selected locations may a = true standard deviation of the random
be used to verify the historic information variable (parameter) being considered
111-50 Design o f Pavement Structures

For a given variable (deflection thickness, e t c ), velop the values (Ax = 0 5 mi), 152 tests were actu­
once a confidence level is selected (e g , 95 percent), ally obtained over the 76-mile project length Had the
Ka and a are constants The R value is inversely pro­ statistical test program with random testing been used
portional to the square root of the number of tests used instead, only 43 4 percent of the tests would have been
if randomly selected Figure 3 19 illustrates the typi­ required Thus, there are obvious economic advan­
cal schematic plot of R versus n As illustrated in the tages to using the statistical approach coupled with the
figure, there are three zones along the accuracy curve analysis unit concept when developing a field sam­
In Zone I, characterized by a steep slope, the preci­ pling and testing program
sion of the estimate significantly increases with each
additional test or sample In this zone, the benefit-cost Guidelines fo r Major Variable Testing/Sampling
ratios for increasing the number of tests per analysis Program. While the previous example has been
unit are quite high and worthwhile On the other hand, based upon confidence estimation of skid resistance,
Zone III is a region with little slope, where even large SN(40), the fundamentals can be applied to all pave­
increases in the number of tests/samples obtained will ment variables in the rehabilitation process Table 3 6
not significantly improve the precision of the estimate is a summary of typical variability values for a wide
In other words, the engineer will certainly not double variety of parameters
the accuracy of the estimates within Zone III by dou­ For all variables, except pavement deflection, vari­
bling the number of tests, and the cost of each addi­ ability is expressed by the standard deviation, s, of the
tional test outweighs the benefits Zone II represents unit parameter distribution Because pavement deflec­
the “ optimal” range in developing a test program, tions vary by load magnitude and load plate character­
because it represents the area where accurate esti­ istics, as well as overall pavement structure, the
mates will be made using a minimum number of tests variability is expressed in terms of the Coefficient of
Variation (CV) value, defined by
Application to the Project Example. Figure 3 20
depicts the limit of accuracy curve developed for the
CV = (s/x)100
example data previously shown in Figures 3 3 and
3 4, and discussed in Appendix J The standard devia­
tion, developed from the within unit variability, re­ The summary shown is intended to serve as a gen­
flects the pooled variance of all 11 analysis units eral guide to the engineer in assessing the required
delineated in Figures 3 4 Table 3 5 presents a sum­ number of tests (samples) to be obtained in the field
mary of the number of tests per analysis unit and the program Whenever possible, design agencies should
resulting limit of accuracy ( + R) about the true unit try to collect their own historic variability data unique
mean value For the problem conditions noted, if an to their own materials, environment, and construction
accuracy of R = ± 1 25 is desired, then 6 tests per practices to supplement the guide data of Table 3 6
unit is satisfactory The entire project would necessi­ Figure 3 21 illustrates typical limit of accuracy
tate only 66 tests (6 tests/unit X 11 analysis units) curves, at a 95-percent confidence level for the varia­
Because an equal interval approach was used to de­ bles and data shown in the table

Table 3.5. Summary Comparison of Statistically Based Field SN(40) Test Sample
Total Number of Actual Tests % Tests Needed
Number of Limit of Accuracy Tests Required Conducted Relative to
Tests Per Unit (±R) in Project in Project Number Used
4 ±1 50 44 152 28 9
5 ±1 38 55 152 36 2
6 ±1 25 66 152 43 4
7 ±1 15 77 152 50 7
8 ±1 08 88 152 57 9
9 ±0 80 176 152 115 8
Guides for Field Data Collection 111-51

u>
c

Typical Limit of Accuracy Curve for all Pavement Variables Showing General Zones
w
(D
0
i_
O
c

c
3
0Q.

C
0
E
0
3
0)
0
0
2
0)
0

0
.O
E
3
Z
I
c

Figure 3.19.

(jeiaiuBJBd jo simp) an|BA a +

(6 U IS B 9 J0 U I)
III-52 Design of Pavement Structures

Limit of Accuracy Curves for an Example Problem

c
D
c
0)
£0)
<
(0/)
0)
1
1
2
</)

<D
■O
E
2

Figure 3.20.

ainqejiau % 06 »e ((OWNS 1° S W ) anleA a +

Guides for Field Data Collection III-53

Table 3.6. Sum m ary of Typical Pavement P aram eter Variability

s—Standard Deviation
Low Average High
1 Thickness (inches):
Portland cement concrete 0 1 0 3 0 5
Asphalt concrete 0 3 0 5 0 7
Cement treated base 0 5 0 6 07
Granular base 0 6 0 8 10
Granular subbase 10 1 2 15

2 Strength:
CBR (%)
Subgrade (4-7) 0 5 10 2 0
Subgrade (7-13) 10 15 2 5
Subgrade (13-20) 2 5 4 0 60
Granular subbase (20-50) 50 80 12 0
Granular base (80 + ) 10 00 15 0 30 0
PCC flexural strength (psi) 65 100 135

3 Percent compaction (%):

Embankment/subgrade 2 0 4 5 70
Subbase/base 20 2 8 35

4 Portland cement concrete properties

Air content (%) 06 10 15
Slump (inches) 06 10 14
28 Day compressive strength (psi) 400 600 800

5 Asphalt concrete properties:

Gradation (%)
3U or V2 15 30 4 5
3/8 2 5 4 0 60
No 4 32 3 8 4 2
No 40 or no 50 13 15 17
No 200 0 8 09 10
Asphalt content (%) 0 1 0 25 04
Percent compaction (%) 0 75 10 15
Marshall mix properties
Stability (lbs) 200 300 400
Flow (in /in ) 10 13 2 0
Air voids (%) 0 8 10 14
AC consistency
Pen (77°F) 2 10 18
Viscosity (149 ° F)—kilopoise 2 25 100
CV—Coefficient of Variation
Low Average High
6 Pavement deflection 15 30 45
111-54 Design o f Pavement Structures

10 20 10 20 30
t R Value ( %)

TO
TO
>
tr
+•
1 R Value (%)

0)
TO
>
cc
+I
t R Value (%)

>
DC

+»
R Value (lbs)

0
J3
TO
>
CC

+1 +I

N-Number of Tests

Figure 3.21. Limit of Accuracy Curves: Mean at (95%) Confidence

Guides for Field Data Collection III-55

N N um ber o f Tests

R Value (%)
^ R Value (%)

t
R Value (%)
^ R Value (%)

t
— ^ Value (%)

1 R Value (psi!
R Value (in)
R Value (psi)

0 10 20 0 10 20 30

Figure 3.21. Continued—Lim it of Accuracy Curves: M ean at (95%) Confidence

 Design

N Number of Test/Samples

10

1 6

1 2

32

24

16

08

16

12

0
10 20 0 10 20 30

Figure 3.21. Continued—Lim it of Accuracy Curves: M ean at (95%) Confidence

Guides for Field Data Collection 111-57

N - Number of Tests

i R Value (Flow)
i R Value (%)

R Value (Pen)
i R Value (%)
R Value (kilopoise)

0 10 20 30

Figure 3.21. Continued—Lim it of Accuracy Curves: M ean at (95%) Confidence

 CHAPTER 4
REHABILITATION METHODS
OTHER THAN OVERLAY

Many different rehabilitation techniques can be nificantly over a given project Repair can then
applied to pavements to extend their lives without the be varied with pavement condition to minimize
placement of an overlay Some of these techniques are costs
applicable prior to an overlay Use of these techniques (3) The results of the distress survey can indicate
is often a cost-effective strategy (in framework of life­ what further testing must be conducted to ob­
cycle cost), and delays the placement of a costly over­ tain sufficient data for design
lay, recycling, or even reconstruction for several
Distress data are helpful in determining the mecha­
years When evaluating the feasibility and effective­
ness of applying rehabilitation methods other than nisms of pavement deterioration Pavement distresses
overlays, several factors must be considered, includ­ can be categorized as being caused either by traffic
loads or nonload factors, including design, construc­
ing the surface distress, structural condition, and
functional condition of the existing pavement This tion, poor-durability materials, and climate factors
This knowledge helps the engineer determine an ap­
chapter describes the background and methodologies
propriate rehabilitation technique
associated with these nonoverlay rehabilitation ap­
proaches

4.1.2 Structural Condition

4.1 EVALUATION OF
PAVEMENT CONDITION The most critical area of concern with regard to the
feasibility of rehabilitation without overlay is the
The evaluation of pavement condition (discussed in structural adequacy of the pavement Only structurally
Chapter 3) includes consideration of specific prob­ adequate pavements or pavements restored to a struc­
lems that exist in the pavement This requires a deter­ turally adequate state, are candidates for rehabilitation
mination of the types and causes of distress, as well as without overlay The structural evaluation must ad­
the extent of pavement deterioration dress whether or not the pavement can support future
traffic loadings over the desired design period without
structural improvement from an overlay This analysis
is directly addressed in Chapters 3 and 5 using the
4.1.1 Surface Distress
NDT evaluation
Existing distress types are an excellent source of
Distress represents a very important and basic
information on the impact of past traffic loadings on
measure of current pavement condition Each type of
the pavement If there is significant load-associated
distress is the result of one or more causes which,
distress, then the structural adequacy of the existing
when known, provide great insight into the type of
pavement must be questioned On multi-lane facili­
rehabilitation work that is required As enumerated
ties, a difference in distress between the outer and the
below, distress data are useful in selecting rehabilita­
inner lanes is an indication of the impact of truck
tion strategies other than overlays
traffic on the structural adequacy of the pavement
(1) Distress types that are present at medium or Historical data on patching and slab replacement are
high severity levels and require repair work, also helpful in ascertaining the rate of deterioration
can be identified and quantified in the plans due to structural loadings
and estimates Another method for estimating the structural ade­
(2) An examination of all distress data collected quacy of a pavement is to work backward through a
will indicate if pavement condition varies sig­ design procedure to determine if the pavement struc­

111-59
111-60 Design o f Pavement Structures

ture is adequate to handle past and future traffic load­ effective combination for the project The following
ings When using this method, the properties of the table provides an example by selecting alternative
existing pavement must be determined; it cannot be methods for a pavement having both pumping (with
assumed that they equal the original properties of the loss of support) and faulting:
pavement at the time of construction The NDT proce­
dures presented in the Guide provide guidelines for
estimating the pavement’s remaining structural life Existing Candidate Candidate
Distress Repair Preventive
Pumping (loss of Subseal Reseal joints
4.1.3 Functional Condition support) Restore load transfer
Tied PCC shoulder
The functional condition of a pavement expresses Subdrainage
its ability to serve the user, and its major indicators Faulting Grind All above
include the following
roughness,
skid resistance/hydroplaning, Another example is given for a flexible pavement
appearance, and
other safety considerations
Existing Candidate Candidate
An adequate evaluation of functional condition re­
Distress Repair Preventive
quires the measurement of roughness and skid resis­
tance along the project in each lane Areas exhibiting Transverse Full-depth patch Patch joint sealing
excessive roughness and/or poor skid resistance crack
should then be noted for special consideration in the Raveling Chip seal coat Rejuvenating seal coat
rehabilitation design Fog seal coat
The overall pavement evaluation should include Rutting Cold mill ruts None known
consideration of the items noted in Figure 2 3 of Level-up overlay
Chapter 2 Each agency should develop procedures in wheel paths
and guidelines for consistently answering the evalua­
tion questions on this list
One repair method and one or more preventive
methods must be selected for each distress type If
only repair work is performed, the mechanism caus­
4.2 DEVELOPM EN T O F FEASIBLE ing the distress will immediately begin its destructive
ALTERNATIVES AND STRATEGIES work when the pavement is opened to traffic After
each distress type has been treated with an appropriate
A feasible alternative is one that addresses the repair, one or more preventive methods must be ap­
cause of the distress and is effective in both repairing plied to provide a cost-effective design For example,
existing deterioration and preventing its recurrence, the following alternatives could be developed for the
while satisfying the imposed constraints Some pro­ jointed concrete pavement above
jects have only one or two feasible nonoverlay alter­
natives
Tables 4 1 and 4 2 contain specific recommenda­ Repair Preventive
tions on the selection of candidate methods to repair Alternative Method Method
distress and prevent its recurrence For each distress
A Subseal pumping Reseal all joints
type, one or more repair and/or preventive mainte­
Grind faults
nance methods can be applied If each of the repair
B Subseal pumping Subdrainage
and preventive methods meet the pavement’s needs
Grind faults
and satisfy the imposed constraints (such as available
C Subseal pumping Ties PCC shoulder
funding and minimum life extension), then they
Grind faults Reseal all joints
qualify as feasible rehabilitation alternatives
D Grind faults
In order to make the most of limited available
Restore load transfer
funds, the engineer must choose the most cost-
Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay III-61

Table 4.1. Candidate Repair and Preventive Methods for Rigid Pavement Distress
Joint/Crack Distress Repair Methods Preventive Methods
Pumping 1 Subseal 1 Reseal joints
2 Restore load* transfer
3 Subdrainage
4 Edge support (PCC shoulder/edge beam)
Faulting 1 Grind 1 Subseal
2 Structural overlay 2 Reseal joints
3 Restore load* transfer
4 Subdrainage
5 Edge support
Slab cracking 1 Full-depth repair 1 Subseal loss of support
2 Replace/recycle lane 2 Restore load* transfer
3 Structural overlay
Joint or crack spalling 1 Full-depth repair 1 Reseal joints
2 Partial-depth repair

Blow-Up 1 Full-depth repair 1 Pressure relief joint

2 Resealing joints/cracks

Punchouts 1 Full-depth repair 1 Polymer or epoxy grouting

2 Subseal loss of support
3 Rigid shoulders
♦Drainage analysis required to determine need and benefit

Table 4.2. Candidate Repair and Preventive Methods for Asphalt Pavement Distress
Distress Repair Methods Preventive Methods
Alligator cracking Full-depth repair Crack sealing
(May slow down alligator cracking)
Bleeding Apply hot sand
Block cracking Seal cracks
Depression Level-up overlay
Polished aggregate Skid resistant
Surface treatment
Slurry seal
Potholes Full-depth repair Crack sealing and seal coats
Pumping Full-depth repair Crack sealing and seal coats
Raveling and weathering Seal coats Rejuvenating seal
Rutting Level-up overlay and/or cold milling
Swell Removal and replacement Paved shoulder encapsulation
111-62 Design of Pavement Structures

Many projects exhibit several types and severities neath the slab surface The patch boundary should not
of distress and, thus, require a combination of several be too close to an existing transverse crack or joint, or
different repair and preventive rehabilitation methods adjacent slab distress will occur In general, particu­
Very often, several combined repair and preventive larly in freeze-thaw climates, the deterioration near
maintenance methods are required to return deterio­ joints and cracks is greater at the bottom of the slab
rated pavement to a serviceable condition for a sub­ than at the top Full-depth repairs are discussed in
stantial period of time Each alternative must be terms of jointed pavements, CRCP, and bituminous
evaluated for cost-effectiveness, and a final selection patches
of the most cost-effective is made
Each agency should develop a comprehensive pave­ Full-Depth Repair o f Jointed Concrete Pave­
ment rehabilitation strategy for every pavement type ments. The joint design of a full-depth repair is a
in their network The strategy should include proce­ major determinant of performance Joint design is still
dures for inspection, evaluation, and selection of largely an art, although excellent analytical tech­
feasible rehabilitation techniques The consideration niques for calculating stresses and deformations are
of preventive techniques is most important available A review by the agency of the joint designs
and their performance for various levels of traffic will
be of great assistance in selecting the required level of
4.3 M A JO R NONOVERLAY M ETHODS load transfer Poor joint load transfer usually leads to
serious spalling, rocking of the patch, faulting, and
While numerous nonoverlay rehabilitation methods corner breaks Following are four techniques used
are utilized, many are experimental in nature This with varying degrees of success to achieve load trans­
section provides a description of the following major fer across transverse patch joints
rehabilitation methods that may be employed as non­
overlay techniques (1) Tie bars deformed rebars are grouted into the
existing slab, or slab reinforcement is extended
(1) Full-Depth Repair into the patch area where minimum joint
(2) Partial-Depth Patching movement is desired
(3) Joint-Crack Sealing (2) Dowel bars smooth steel bars are inserted into
(4) Subsealing-U ndersealing drilled holes in the existing slab where move­
(5) Grinding and Milling ment of the joint is desired
(6) Subdrainage (3) Undercutting the subbase/roadbed is exca­
(7) Pressure Relief Joints vated out fiom beneath the slab and replaced
(8) Load Transfer Restoration with concrete This method should not be used
(9) Surface Treatments in freeze areas since differential heaving be­
tween the patch and existing slab causes severe
roughness Even in nonfrost areas, poor load
4.3.1 Full-D epth R epair transfer will be obtained if good concrete con­
solidation of the lip is not obtained, or if the
Full-depth repair has applications to all types of
patch settles
pavement and typically represents a large cost item in
(4) Aggregate interlock this can only be used
a rehabilitation project Because of the high cost of
with rough-faced joints and short joint spac­
patching, many agencies tend not to repair distressed
ings It is unreliable with heavy truck loads
areas that should be repaired during pavement rehabil­
itation This may result in rapid deterioration and There are several types of distress that occur at or
more costly rehabilitation in the future near transverse joints that may justify full-depth
The first step in the repair process is determination repair These are blow-ups, corner breaks, durability
of locations and boundaries Specific distress requir­ “ D ” cracking, and load transfer-associated distress
ing repair must be identified and boundaries selected Some spalls that extend less than halfway through the
Larger areas of extensive distress must be identified slab can be patched with partial-depth patches, as dis­
for complete removal and replacement of slabs It is cussed in Section 4 3 2
also important that patch boundaries be selected so Some pavements develop intermediate cracks that
that most of the significant underlying deterioration is deteriorate (e g , spall and fault) through heavy traffic
removed The results of a coring study provide infor­ repeated loading Locking of the doweled joints accel­
mation on additional deterioration that may exist be­ erates crack deterioration by forcing open the interme­
Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay 111-63

diate cracks, which soon lose aggregate interlock un­ Criteria for repair dimensions should provide ade­
der heavy repeated traffic Cracks that are working quate lap length and cleanout, and minimize or elimi­
should generally be repaired either with a full-depth nate patch rocking, pumping, and breakup The repair
tied patch or a working joint boundary should not be too close to an existing trans­
There are also many situations in which existing verse crack or joint because adjacent slab distress will
distress is so extensive that the patching of every develop Generally, the patch joint should not be
deteriorated joint and crack would be either very ex­ closer than 18 inches to the nearest tight crack How­
pensive or impractical Repair cost can be reduced by ever, where cracks are very closely spaced it is some­
simply removing and replacing larger areas of con­ times necessary to place the repair as close as 6 inches
crete slab Thus, for a given distressed area, the engi­ to an existing tight transverse crack
neer should estimate the cost for large removal and There are also some situations where existing
replacement and for patching of each localized dis­ distress is so extensive that the repair of every deterio­
tress using typical costs, and then select the lower cost rated area within a short distance would be either very
alternative If the costs are approximately the same, expensive or impractical Repair costs may be reduced
the large area removal and replacement should be by simply removing and replacing larger areas of the
selected, since this will certainly be the most reliable CRCP slab
repair (as opposed to numerous patches) When two or more adjacent lanes contain distress,
On multiple-lane highways, deterioration may one lane should be repaired at a time so that traffic
occur only in one lane or across two or more lanes If flow can be maintained If the distress, such as a wide
distress exists in only one joint, it is not necessary to crack with ruptured steel, occurs across all lanes, spe­
patch the other lanes When two or more adjacent cial considerations are needed due to the high poten­
lanes contain distress, one lane should generally be tial for: (a) blow-ups in the adjacent lane, (b) crushing
patched at a time to maintain traffic flow This prac­ of the new repair during the first few hours of curing
tice also reduces the potential of a blow-up occurring by the expanding CRCP slab, and (c) serious cracking
in the other nonpatched lane For example, on a high­ of the repair during the first night as the existing
way having three lanes in one direction, only one lane CRCP contracts The following procedures will mini­
should be patched at a time to reduce the potential for mize problems
blow-ups If blow-ups occur during the patching of
(1) The repair should be placed in the afternoon to
one lane, it may be necessary to cut relief joints at
avoid being crushed under expansion
intervals of 600 to 1,200 feet or delay patching until
(2) The lane having the lowest truck traffic should
cooler weather occurs
be repaired first
Full-Depth Repair o f Continuously Reinforced The recommended design of the repair provides for
Concrete Pavement. This section describes proce­ adequate bar/wire laps in the repair area The new
dures for full-depth repair of CRCP Only cast-in- reinforcement can be tied, welded, or secured with
place concrete repairs for permanent repair are mechanical couplers to the existing reinforcement so
discussed Bituminous patches are not recommended that the full strength of the bar/wire is developed The
for permanent repair of CRCP because they break the reinforcing steel should be placed so that a minimum
continuity of the reinforced concrete system and pro­ of 2 5 inches of cover is provided The bars should be
vide no load transfer across the joint, which results in placed and supported by chairs or by any other means
deterioration of the CRCP Field experience has available, such that the steel will not permanently
shown that adequate load transfer can be obtained bend down during placement of the concrete
when (a) the reinforcing steel is extended into the
repair and tied or welded to additional reinforcement Patching With Bituminous Mixtures. This sec­
placed in the repair, (b) the subbase is not seriously tion concerns the patching of asphalt and rigid
deteriorated beneath the joint, and (c) the repair face (concrete) surfaced pavements with bituminous patch­
is nearly vertical and rough beneath the reinforce­ ing mixtures There are two main types of bituminous
ment, and not spalled underneath patching mixtures (a) those mixed hot and compacted
As stated, several types of distress justify full-depth while still hot, and (b) those mixed and then stock­
repair such as blow-ups, punchouts, durability “ D ” piled for a period before use These mixtures range
cracking, and construction joint problems Each widely in quality and costs The performance of a
agency should develop recommendations to closely fit bituminous patch depends on both the quality of the
local conditions materials comprising the patching mixture and the
111-64 Design o f Pavement Structures

quality of construction effort in placing and compact­ repair areas, as well as the materials used Lane clo­
ing the mixture The best bituminous patching mix­ sure time and traffic volume also affect production
ture will last only a short time if good construction rates and costs
practices are not followed Partial-depth patching can be used to address cer­
Patching is frequently associated with the forma­ tain types of distress that do not extend through the
tion of potholes in flexible pavements which develop full depth of the slab, but instead affect only the top
through the combined effects of moisture and traffic few inches These distresses include the following
Bituminous patching is used as a restoration tool for
damaged areas not classified as a pothole area, and is (1) spalls that have resulted from the use of joint
sometimes used as a means of relieving expansive inserts where hardness of aggregates made
pressure in rigid pavements The use of bituminous sawing of the joints difficult or expensive,
patching is discussed separately in Section 4 3 7 (2) spalls caused by the infiltration of incompres­
Localized repair (such as pothole patches) is not sible materials into the joints,
the only reason for bituminous patching Large areas (3) spalls caused by misalignment of dowels or
of flexible pavements may develop fatigue cracking, other load transfer devices,
indicating inadequate structural capacity If these (4) localized areas of scaling, and
areas are not patched properly, any resurfacing will (5) distress associated with early stages of “ D ”
prove to be a waste of money, since the overlay will cracking of alkali reactivity
deteriorate very rapidly in these areas The patching
of these areas in order to provide a suitable foundation Procedures. Many of these distress types occur
will be discussed later adjacent to joints Effective sealing of these joints re­
Bituminous patches in concrete pavements present quires repair of the adjacent distress Failure to repair
unique problems due to the presence of dissimilar ma­ these areas prior to placement of an overlay will often
terials Many distress types requiring a concrete patch
result in the appearance of reflective cracks which
can be considered as a potential candidate for a bitu­
break down rapidly, causing premature failure of the
minous patch Such a patch should not, however, be
overlay
considered as a permanent patch Blow-ups, panel
The actual extent of deterioration in the concrete
cracks, etc , can all be repaired with bituminous mate­
may be greater than the amount showing at the sur­
rials if the cause of the distress is also corrected Spe­
face In early stages of spall formation, weakened
cial care must be taken if a bituminous patch is to be
planes often exist with no visible sign of deterioration
placed at a joint because the bituminous patch will
The actual extent of deterioration should be deter­
behave as an expansion joint and allow the concrete
mined since all weak concrete must be removed for
pavement to compress the patch These patches should
effective restoration After removal, the bottom of the
be continually observed and not be considered as
patch is normally checked by “ sounding” or other
being permanent
specified methods to ensure complete removal of dete­
riorated material The typical depth of concrete re­
4.3.2 Partial-Depth Pavement Repair moval varies from 1 to 4 inches Destructive testing
(e g , cores) may be helpful in defining the depth
This section describes considerations for the de­ limits The removal operation should provide a very
sign of partial-depth patches in concrete pavements irregular surface to ensure a high degree of mechani­
The items addressed include: (a) criteria for partial- cal interlock between the repair material and the exist­
depth patches by identification of distress types which ing slab
can be repaired, and (b) description of successful pro­ If sound concrete cannot be reached, a full-depth
cedures for partial-depth patching patch is required Small areas of full-depth patching
have been combined with partial-depth patches, but
Criteria. Patching concrete pavement is often generally these have not performed as well as full-
necessary to restore the level of serviceability When depth patches
applied at appropriate locations, partial-depth patch­ Small spall areas along joints generally do not re­
ing can be more cost-effective than full-depth patch­ quire repair Areas less than 6 inches and 1V2 inches
ing (e g , replacing an entire joint to address small wide at the widest point are normally not repaired, but
spalls) The cost of partial-depth patching is largely are filled with a sealant (unless a preformed compres­
dependent on the size, number, and location of the sion seal is to be used in the joint)
Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay 111-65

Partial-depth patches placed adjacent to transverse, 4.3.3 Joint and C rack Sealing
centerline, or shoulder joints require special design
and construction considerations Partial-depth patches Sealing and resealing of joints and cracks in both
placed directly in contact with the adjacent lane fre­ concrete and asphalt pavements is an important phase
quently develop spalling because of curling stresses of restoration that is often not adequately considered
This can be prevented by placing a polyethylene strip The effectiveness of sealing joints and cracks in ex­
(or other thin bond-breaker material) along the tending the serviceable life of a pavement has long
centerline joint just prior to placement of the patching been a matter of controversy among highway agencies
material in the United States Inadequate sealing increases dis­
Partial-depth patches placed directly against adja­ tress caused by free water entering the pavement struc­
cent slabs (across the transverse joint) will be crushed ture, and from the infiltration of incompressibles into
by the compressive forces created when the slabs ex­ the transverse joint The excess water can accelerate
pand This may be prevented by placing a strip of damage in both flexible and rigid pavements, and in­
styrofoam or asphalt-impregnated fiberboard between compressibles can cause blow-ups and joint deteriora­
the new concrete and the adjoining slab The patch tion over time in the rigid pavements
material must be prevented from infiltrating into the Serviceability and pavement life may be extended
opening since it will result in damaging compressive through the proper resealing of the joints or cracks
stresses at lower depths This step will also guard which develop in the pavement These benefits in­
against damage due to differential vertical movement clude
of the joint when the adjacent lane is trafficked during (1) the removal of incompressibles and the preven­
curing of the patch tion of further intrusion, and
Some patches have been successfully constructed (2) the reduction of water infiltration, and the
without transverse joint forms by sawing the trans­ chemicals that may be brought along, into the
verse joint to full depth as soon as the patching mate­ joint or crack
rial has gained sufficient strength to permit sawing
In general, resealing can be cost-effective on major
Any closing of the joint before sawing will fracture the
highways in all climate regions for one of the two
patch To avoid this problem, joints must be formed in
reasons given above The joint seal need not accom­
partial-depth patches placed across a joint or crack
plish both to be effective It depends on the particular
Any patch along the shoulder edge must be formed problem existing in the immediate area If the results
If the patch material flows into the shoulder, it may of the drainage survey show that moisture in the pave­
form a “ key,” restricting longitudinal movement of the ment structure will accelerate, or has accelerated dis­
slab tress, then resealing of the joints or cracks is essential
After the surface of the existing concrete has been On low-truck-volume roads, sealing may not be cost-
prepared and just prior to placement of the patch ma­ effective, especially in dryer climates The extent of
terial, the patch area should be coated with a bonding distress caused or accelerated by free moisture in the
agent to ensure complete bonding of the patch material pavement structure of the project under consideration
to the surrounding concrete Common types of bond­ should be considered in deciding whether or not to
ing agents include portland cement/sand mixes and reseal joints or cracks
epoxy resins The surface should be surface-dry be­ Rigid pavements that have experienced blow-ups
fore the grout is applied, and no free water should be can be treated with an adequate program of joint or
present Thorough coating of the bottom and all sides crack cleaning and sealing to keep further incompres­
of the patch area is essential The grout should be sibles out of the pavement, slowing the development
placed immediately before the patch material is placed of further blow-ups Thermal cracking in asphalt
so that the grout does not set before it comes in contact pavements can be kept at low severity levels with
with the patching material adequate sealing to keep out moisture and incom­
Since partial-depth patches often have large surface pressibles
areas with respect to their volumes, moisture can be To ensure that moisture-accelerated distress will
lost quickly Inadequate attention to curing can result not reduce the life of a pavement, all of the major
in the development of shrinkage cracks that may cause sources of water infiltration must be sealed These
the patch to fail prematurely Thus, curing is as im­ major sources include: (a) transverse joints in jointed
portant for partial-depth patches as it is for full-depth concrete pavements, (b) longitudinal lane/shoulder
patches joints, (c) longitudinal joints between traffic lanes,
111-66 Design o f Pavement Structures

and (d) cracks in asphalt or concrete pavement 4.3.4 Subsealing of Concrete Pavements
surfaces
The need for sealing the longitudinal lane/shoulder Pavement subsealing is utilized to fill voids either
joint is reduced only slightly with properly designed at the slab-subbase interface or beneath the subbase
and constructed longitudinal underdrains The large These voids are caused by pumping action, generally
amount of water entering through the joint may carry beneath a concrete pavement slab and/or subbase In
fines through the drain This could result in problems some special cases, flexible (semi-rigid) pavements
similar to those caused by pumping water upward can also be undersealed In jointed concrete pave­
through the joint ments, voids may develop under transverse joints and
cracks In CRCP, voids can develop anywhere along
the slab edge The loss of support caused by void
Joint Sealing. There are a wide variety of seal­ formation results in large deflections and stresses in
ants on the market today with different properties the slabs leading to serious problems with JPCP and
The general categories of sealant include: JRCP, including faulting, corner breaks, diagonal
cracks, and finally, complete breakup of the slab
field poured sealants—self-leveling With CRCP, the loss of support is one of the single
hot-poured most serious structural problems leading to a rapid
cold-poured increase in edge punchouts
preformed compression seals Subsealing is performed with a cement grout or
field-poured sealants—nonself-leveling asphalt cement When the subseal material has suffi­
ciently filled the voids, restoration of support to the
The factors that influence the performance of a slabs will be reflected by a reduction in corner deflec­
sealant include the movement of the joint or crack, the tion in JPCP or JRCP, and edge deflection in CRCP
sealant reservoir shape, the bonding between the seal­ Subsealing should not be confused with the term “ slab
ant and sidewall, and the properties of the sealant All jacking” which refers to the lifting of a depressed
of these factors must be considered in the design of a slab to its original position matching the profile of
joint resealing or sealing project A procedure for de­ the road Subsealing does not correct depressions, in­
veloping the proper dimensions is outlined in Part II, crease a pavement’s structural capacity, or eliminate
Section 3 3 3, “Joint Sealant Dim ensions” faulting Filling voids restores a pavement’s structural
integrity, thereby reducing future pumping, faulting,
and slab cracking However, this benefit may diminish
Crack Sealing Cracks, unlike joints, are irregu­
over time, in which case, additional subsealing will be
lar in dimension and direction, which makes them
required Where serious pumping has occurred, sub­
more difficult to seal Fortunately, most cracks will sealing should be accompanied by efforts to reduce the
not experience the deformation that joints are sub­ amount of water entering the pavement Subsealing
jected to, which potentially allows the sealant to per­ should only be performed at joints/cracks where loss
form better than it would in a joint Thus, the sealing of support exists, where pumping is visibly evident, or
procedures for cracks are not quite as strict as they are where high deflections exist
for joints In some cases, however, joints freeze due to
dowel bar corrosion and cause cracks to function as Project Analysis The design of a subsealing pro­
joints If the distress survey indicates that the distance ject includes (a) testing the pavement to determine if
between cracks is great enough to cause very large there are voids, (b) selecting an acceptable grout
movements at the cracks, then the cracks must be con­ mixture or asphalt cement, (c) estimating required
sidered joints and handled as such material quantities, (d) determining an appropriate
Thermal cracks in asphalt concrete pavements are a initial hole pattern, and (e) preparing plans and speci­
working crack, and can be treated the same as a joint, fications
since they will experience large movements due to Cement grout mixtures must be capable of pene­
temperature variations The reservoir in the crack will trating very thin voids, yet have sufficient strength and
normally not be as clean or as well-formed as that durability to resist the effects of loading, moisture,
obtained in a joint The size of the reservoir in the and temperature Two different types of grouts are
crack should be similar to the size required for a joint currently in use pozzolanic cement grouts and lime­
undergoing the same movement to minimize the stone cement grouts Various additives are available
stresses as much as possible which may be used to alter the behavior of the grout
Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay 111-67

Some of the additives are water-reducing agents, a rotary drum to chip off as much as 3 to 4 inches of
fluidifiers, expanding agents (powdered alumina to asphalt concrete surface The major purpose of cold
offset the shrinkage which sometimes occurs with vol­ milling is to remove asphalt material
canic ashes), and calcium chloride (to accelerate the
set of the grout) Diamond Grinding o f Portland Cement Concrete
Generally, the asphalt used in a grout mixture for Surfaces. Diamond grinding is an effective tech­
undersealing should have a low penetration point and nique for: (1) removal of joint and crack faulting,
a high softening point It must also have a viscosity (2) removal of wheel path ruts caused by studded tires,
suitable for pumping when heated to temperatures (3) correction of joint unevenness caused by slab
from 400 to 450°F warping, and (4) restoration of transverse drainage
Based on the analysis of deflection test results, an It should be stressed that diamond grinding is a
initial hole pattern can be recommended that retains repair technique since it corrects the existing faulting
the flexibility to meet field conditions The pattern and rutting of concrete pavements, but it does nothing
should consider the general location of voids and their to correct the distress mechanisms Therefore, grind­
approximate size Other factors influencing hole ing is usually performed in combination with other
patterns include joint/crack condition, joint/crack lo­ rehabilitation techniques to both repair certain pave­
cation, subbase condition, subbase stabilization, etc ment distresses and prevent their recurrence Dia­
Holes should be drilled through the slab and into the mond grinding is a good example of a rehabilitation
nonstabilized subbase a few inches because the depth technique which significantly improves the rideability
of the void is uncertain With stabilized bases, voids of a pavement, but the life extension achieved depends
are often located in the roadbed below the subbase heavily on the effectiveness of the other rehabilitation
and, therefore, holes should be drilled through the activities performed concurrently
stabilized subbase a maximum of 3 inches into the Data from condition surveys and roughness mea­
roadbed Close inspection is required by the contract­ surements should be used to determine when grinding
ing agency during subsealing to prevent overgrouting is an appropriate repair technique for the distress ex­
and slab lifting, which can create other voids beneath isting in a pavement An important item to measure
the slab or induce high slab stresses with regard to diamond grinding is the amount of
The repair effectiveness is determined by re­ faulting present Grinding should be performed only
measuring the deflection of the slab at the same points in lanes that have significant faulting, wheel path
after subsealing This testing should also include some wear, or other surface roughness or profile problems
joints which were not grouted for use as control joints Each agency must develop its own criteria for what
Using the methods previously described, if voids are constitutes significant wear and rutting in order to
still located after the grouting, the slab should be develop the most timely and cost-effective approach to
regrouted maintaining and rehabilitating its pavements By
monitoring the rate of faulting increase, an agency
can determine when a pavement will need diamond
4.3.5 Diamond Grinding of Concrete Surfaces grinding
and Cold Milling of Asphalt Surfaces It is important to repair the pavement to some mini­
mum level of structural integrity prior to grinding
This section describes two different techniques that Placing spall repairs, full-depth patches and new slabs
may be used to alter the surface of concrete and as­ ensures the elimination of construction-related rough­
phalt pavements for a variety of purposes These res­ ness If the observed roughness is caused by faulting
toration techniques are commonly used in conjunction of the joints or cracks, pumping may have occurred
with other techniques to restore the pavement to a beneath the slabs If nothing is done to reduce pump­
condition resembling that of a new pavement How­ ing, faulting will develop again, and probably more
ever, in certain cases they can be justified as the sole rapidly Depressions should be leveled up by slab
restoration technique performed jacking or slab replacement prior to grinding It is
Diamond grinding (texturing) is the use of closely generally not cost-effective to grind out major depres­
spaced diamond-impregnated blades to cut patterns sions in the pavement Any medium or high severity
into hardened concrete The major purpose of grind­ depressions should be removed by slab jacking before
ing is to remove relatively thin layers of concrete sur­ grinding begins Roughness measurements taken
face material and provide a smooth surface Cold along the project and over each lane often provide an
milling is the use of carbide cutting teeth mounted on excellent indication of depression and swell locations
111-68 Design o f Pavement Structures

In a rehabilitation project involving grinding, the The cold-milled asphalt concrete surface generally
sequence of work is very important Subsealing, full- provides a friction-resistant surface After time, the
depth repair, and spall repair should all be completed milled pattern will be worn down and the fractured
before grinding Joint resealing should follow the aggregate surface will provide all the friction resist­
grinding operation ance present If the aggregate is susceptible to polish­
For best results, diamond grinding should be per­ ing, the friction resistance will eventually be worn
formed continuously along a traffic lane Continuous away under traffic This consideration should be in­
grinding is required to provide the riding quality of vestigated when the pavement is left open to traffic
new pavement The quality of the grinding job can be A uniform texture should be produced throughout
determined by remeasuring the roughness using test­ the entire length of the project The longitudinal pro­
ing equipment and methods commonly used for new file should be held to the same tolerance as new
pavement construction construction

Cold Milling o f Asphalt Concrete Surfaces.

Cold milling has been successful in removing as much
as 3 to 4 inches of asphalt concrete surfacing in a 4.3.6 Subdrainage Design
single pass Cold milling has also been used success­
fully on concrete pavements to provide a surface for Subdrainage is an important consideration in the
bonding a concrete overlay and for removing deterio­ resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation of pave­
rated asphalt overlays Cold milling is not recom­ ment systems Water is a fundamental variable in most
mended for concrete pavements that are to be left in problems associated with pavement performance and
service without an overlay because the surface will be is directly or indirectly responsible for many of the
extremely rough and the joints will be spalled sig­ distresses found in pavement systems Appendix AA,
nificantly Major uses of cold milling include the “ Guidelines for the Design of Highway Internal
following Drainage Systems,” Volume 2, should be referred to
for guidance in developing a drainage system for
(1) restoring the curb line of asphalt pavements, rehabilitation
(2) restoring cross slope of asphalt pavements to A drainage survey may indicate that a subdrainage
improve drainage or correcting drainage inlet system is required to control one or more sources of
cover problems, water in the pavement Pavement construction and
(3) improving friction resistance of asphalt maintenance activities often require several types of
surfaces, subsurface drainage The removal of water will in­
(4) removing asphalt overlays of concrete
crease the strength or stiffness of the pavement,
pavements,
thereby extending the life Thus, considerable care is
(5) providing a roughened, clean surface for
required when designing elaborate and complex drain­
bonding a concrete overlay,
age systems The designer must reevaluate the mate­
(6) removing material in conjunction with
rial properties used in design, as outlined in Section
surface recycling, and
2 3 of Part II, “ Material Properties for Structural
(7) removing material to provide a smoother
Design ”
surface (where the pavement is structurally
Subsurface drainage systems should be designed
adequate)
and constructed with long-term performance and
After removal of the surface material through cold maintenance in mind, including periodic inspections
milling, most pavements are overlaid Some projects, to check performance Outflow measurements taken at
however, have been milled and opened to traffic with­ periodic intervals can be compared to those obtained
out placement of an overlay but tire noise is high and immediately after construction to determine whether
may generate public complaints If the pavement is or not the drainage system is functioning properly
structurally sound, but rough from various nonload- Substantial decreases may indicate a need for cleaning
related distresses, this may be a very cost-effective and/or maintenance activities The adequacy of the
means of delaying overlay placement for a few years subdrainage installations for an existing pavement can
The milled surface is not too rough (except, possibly, be evaluated by working through a complete “ new”
for bicyclists) and should provide acceptable service drainage analysis of the pavement and assessing its
for a few years capacity to drain the pavement system
Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay 111-69

4.3.7 Pressure Relief Joints either side Foi this reason, pressure relief joints are
typically installed at intervals of 700 to 1,500 feet
The performance of concrete pavements in many When bridge pushing is the only problem, the joints
areas of the country may be seriously impaired by are typically located only near the approach slabs
expansive pressures caused by net increases in pave­ The expansion joint is filled with a compressible
ment length These increases in length are the result of filler material such as styrofoam or sponge rubber to
one or more factors infiltration of incompressibles prevent intrusion of incompressibles Preformed joint
into poorly sealed joints and cracks, pumping of base seals have also been used with some success On high­
materials into joints and cracks, or the use of expan­ ways with very heavy traffic, particularly where a
sive or reactive aggregates in initial construction bituminous overlay is to be placed, special heavy-duty
Generally, transverse joints and cracks become expansion joints have been provided
filled with incompressible materials when the joints Some agencies have constructed asphalt cement
are open and not properly sealed The joints are wid­ patches in portland cement concrete pavements to
est during the colder seasons in which sand and other serve as expansion joints These patches are generally
de-icing materials are placed on pavement surfaces about 4 feet wide and are typically placed in deterio­
Intrusion can also occur from beneath the slab when rated areas requiring full-depth patching They often
the vertical deflection at the joint or crack causes result in “ humping” of the asphalt patch as the con­
pumping of water and base material particles upward crete pavement expands into the original patch area
into the joint opening In time, a buildup of incom­ This “ humping” and the accompanying loss of load
pressibles develops, and the intrusions cause the pave­ transfer, rocking of slabs, and settlement or heaving of
ment to “ grow” Although the slabs remain the same concrete patch areas may result in rough pavements
length, the joints and cracks fill with incompressibles and loss of pavement serviceability
and thereby prevent the pavement from expanding in The effect of pressure relief on existing pavement
warmer and wetter periods of the year design must be considered prior to installation of pres­
Some agencies have experienced an actual increase sure relief joints Short-jointed, undowelled concrete
in the length of the pavement slab due to a buildup of pavements are generally poor candidates for use of
incompressibles This generally occurs in areas where pressure relief joints Pressure relief joints will cause
reactive or expansive aggregates have been used The loss of aggregate interlock load transfer in the area of
result of the concrete pavement’s growth is an increase relief, which may result in increased slab cracking and
in compressive stress in the slabs When this stress faulting They will also allow water to enter the pave­
exceeds the compressive strength of the slab, spalling ment structure, resulting in deterioration of the sub­
or a blow-up occurs In addition, pavement growth base, pumping, rocking of the slab, etc Similarly,
may result in “ bridge pushing ” As a pavement ex­ pressure relief joints should not be used in CRCP
pands during the warm season, particularly when in­ because they destroy the integrity of the pavement and
trusion is present, it will push against the approach allow water to enter the subbase more freely, resulting
slabs of bridges In the following sections, the design in rapid loss of subgrade support They should be used
of pressure relief joints is discussed on these types of pavements only near bridges when
shoving or blow-up has occurred
Pressure R elief Joint Design. Pressure relief The effect of pressure relief on existing joint seals
joints (also known as expansion joints) are full-width must also be considered Preformed compression
and full-depth cuts in the slab used to reduce compres­ seals may lose contact with joint reservoir walls as the
sive stresses Although the exact dimensions vary, joints open, and the seals will no longer be effective in
pressure relief joints are normally 2 to 4 inches wide preventing water and incompressibles from entering
when constructed Due to the potential difficulty of the joints Similarly, the effectiveness of other types of
sawing through dowels or other load transfer devices joint seals will be diminished if they are damaged by
and the danger of encountering unstable subbase con­ excessive joint openings It must be confirmed that
ditions near old joints, pressure relief joints are nor­ transverse joint seals will remain effective after instal­
mally placed near mid-slab Some agencies have lation of pressure relief joints, or it may become nec­
placed expansion joints at full-depth patches, but this essary to reseal the joints later
procedure sometimes produces patch rocking and ac­ The optimum time for placement of pressure relief
celerated failure joints has not been determined It is clear that many
Studies by several agencies have concluded that jointed concrete pavements perform for over 30 years
blow-ups tend to relieve stress for about 500 feet on without ever exhibiting blow-ups or pushing of bridge
111-70 Design o f Pavement Structures

abutments Thus, construction of expansion joints is Because they usually provide no load transfer, pres­
currently recommended only after major blow-ups sure relief joints should be used only on pavements
have occurred, since their placement can result in that are subject to blow-ups or are pushing bridges
opening of contraction joints Deflections at the joint will tend to be high, the adja­
cent slab may deteriorate, and the joint may pump and
Major Considerations and Limitations. Pressure fault In wet areas, subdrainage may be necessary to
relief joints are almost always installed on pavements prevent pumping
having more than one traffic lane, thus, it is generally Pressure relief joints may completely close over
impossible to install material across the full pavement time, making the pavement susceptible to blow-ups
width on the same day When relief is provided for one and bridge pushing again if the cause of the problem is
lane only, the other lane(s) can be subjected to sub­ not remedied If intrusion of incompressibles into the
stantially higher compressive stresses A number of joints is not stopped or if reactive aggregate problems
major blow-ups have occurred in adjacent lanes when are present, the construction of pressure relief joints
the installation of pressure relief joints across all lanes will provide only a temporary solution
has been delayed For this reason, it is necessary to
install pressure relief joints in all adjoining lanes as
soon as possible If the joints are constructed during 4.3.8 Restoration of Joint Load Transfer in
seasons with moderate daily temperature variations, a Jointed Concrete Pavements
period of 48 hours between construction of expansion
joints in adjacent lanes will normally not be harmful This section describes different techniques that
During the warmest time of the year, or in pavements may be used to restore the load transfer of portland
cement concrete (PCC) pavement joints and cracks to
with expansive aggregates, compressive forces in the
reduce pavement stresses and deflections, and thus the
pavement may be sufficient to pinch or bind the saw
rate of deterioration The ability of a joint or crack to
blades during the sawing operation In addition, the
transfer load is a major factor in its structural per­
problem of unequal pressure between adjacent lanes is
formance Load transfer efficiency across a joint or
often aggravated during warm weather For this rea­
crack is normally defined as the ratio of deflection of
son, a temperature range of 40 to 70 °F is recom­
the unloaded side of the joint or crack to the deflection
mended for installation Relief joints may be installed
of the loaded side If complete load transfer exists, the
during the summer months by sawing at night or early
ratio will be 1 00 (or 100 percent), and if no load
in the morning
transfer exists, the ratio will be 0 00 (or 0 percent)
On some pavements, blow-up frequency has in­
(See Chapter 3 for further details ) Poor load transfer
creased after overlay with bituminous materials indi­
may cause large increases in slab stresses and deflec­
cating that a need for pressure relief existed prior to tions, resulting in slab breakup and loss of service­
overlay However, when expansion joints are placed ability
prior to overlay, the overlay often deteriorates badly Dowelled joints normally exhibit very good load
under heavy traffic in the area of the expansion joint transfer (i e , between 70 and 100 percent) However,
This is due to fatigue that develops as a result of high lepeated heavy loads can cause the dowel sockets to
differential deflections at the joint It has also been deteriorate, resulting in looseness of the dowels,
determined that the placement of bituminous overlays faulted and spalled joints, and loss of load transfer
aggravates problems inherent in some pavements Many jointed plain concrete pavements have been con­
susceptible to blow-ups by holding moisture in the structed without dowels at transverse joints The load
concrete pavement structure (e g , the accelerated ex­ transfer measured at these joints is typically low
pansion of moisture-susceptible aggregates resulting (except on warm afternoons when joints close tightly)
in weakened concrete near the joint areas) Installa­ Transverse cracks in both jointed plain and reinforced
tion of pressure relief joints prior to placement of concrete pavements can also have poor load transfer,
bonded concrete overlays has produced debonding in particularly when the reinforcing steel has ruptured
the area of the joint This is because it is extremely
difficult to saw the joint in the overlay soon enough to Determining the Need fo r Load Transfer Restora­
prevent the underlying slab from moving indepen­ tion Restoration of load transfer across a transverse
dently of the fresh overlay It is generally recom­ joint or crack is performed to retard joint and crack
mended that bonded concrete overlays be placed prior deterioration, pumping, faulting, spalling, and corner
to the construction of pressure relief joints breaks Thus, joints and cracks requiring load transfer
Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay 111-71

restoration must be identified prior to overlay or per­ 4.3.9 Surface Treatm ents
formance of other rehabilitation work
Load transfer should be measured during cooler The use of surface treatments or seal coats is a
periods, normally in the early morning Load transfer method of pavement rehabilitation for asphalt pave­
is often lowest in the outer wheel path and, since most ments of all classes, from low-volume roads to
loads will pass over this area, it should be measured at Interstate highways This rehabilitation category is an
this point The test load should be applied on one side application of asphalt and/or aggregate to a roadway
of the joint or crack Deflection measurements should surface, generally less than 1 inch thick, which im­
be taken on both sides directly adjacent to the joint or proves or protects the surface characteristics of the
crack in accordance with procedures noted in Section roadway In general, there is little or no direct struc­
3 5 4 Load transfer restoration should be considered tural improvement of a pavement when a surface treat­
for all transverse joints and cracks that exhibit mea­ ment is used However, indirect benefits in increased
sured deflection load transfer between 0 and 50 per­ life and structural capacity can be obtained with this
cent This applies to jointed concrete pavements with technique
or without asphalt concrete overlays Seal coats and/or surface treatments have long been
used as standard asphalt pavement maintenance and
Design Considerations. Dowels may be installed rehabilitation procedures Historically, they have been
to restore load transfer of a joint or crack Dowels used primarily for low-volume streets and roads, ex­
placed in slots cut in the pavement are effective in tending pavement life at low expense Because of
restoring load transfer across joints or cracks The newer applications, surface treatments and seal coats
required number, diameter, and spacing of the dowel are discussed to provide the engineer with an under­
bars must be determined The diameter of the dowels standing of what these applications can do for a pave­
and the number placed in the outer wheel path have a ment, and how to ensure an adequate application of
major influence on the prevention of faulting Dowels materials for a seal coat or surface treatment In the
should be 18 inches long and at least 1 25 inches in following sections, the classification, functions, and
diameter For a maximum allowable fault of 0 10 inch, design of surface treatments are discussed
the following dowel designs are suggested
Classification o f Seals or Surface Treatments.
Seal coats and surface treatments are classified on the
N um ber of Dowels Diam eter basis of their composition, which may be either solely
in W heelpath (inches) asphalt or, more normally, a combination of asphalt
2 1 625 and aggregate The following are typical categories
3 1 625 (1) Open-Graded Friction Courses These appli­
4 1 250 cations of asphalt and aggregate are designed
6 2 250 to drain water off the pavement surface by
providing an open, porous structure in the
mixture The rapid removal of watei reduces
The successful installation of load transfer devices the potential for hydroplaning and, hence, wet
requires sound concrete adjacent to the joint or crack weather accidents These applications are of­
If the concrete is deteriorated, full-depth repair is ten called plant mix seals or popcorn mixes
more appropriate than load transfer restoration Joints (2) Asphalt-Aggregate Surface Treatments These
or cracks having high deflections must be subsealed treatments consist of sequential applications of
before load transfer devices are installed The cause of asphalt and stone chips which can be made
joint distress should be determined and attempts either singly or in repetitive layers to build up a
should be made to correct deficiencies before per­ structure approaching 1 inch thick (or more),
forming load transfer restoration work sometimes called armor coating These appli­
Additional work to be completed prior to load cations represent the traditional seal coating
transfer restoration may include subsealing to fill done by local agencies They also serve as the
voids in the pavement foundation, grinding to elimi­ surfacing for low-volume roads
nate faulting, and spall repairs Work that may be done (3) Rubberized Asphalt Seal This application is
after load transfer restoration includes joint and crack a special type of asphalt-aggregate surface
sealing and subdrain installation treatment The asphalt material is replaced
111-72 Design of Pavement Structures

with a specialized blend of rubber and asphalt oughly (L A Abrasion and the Sulfate Sound­
cement This application has been used as part ness Test) to ensure that it has satisfactory
of a SAMI (Stress-Absorbing Membrane Inter­ durability
layer) to reduce reflection cracking prior to (2) Seal Cracks The application of aggregate
overlaying It has been used without overlays and/or asphalt in these seal coats provides a
recently to take advantage of the added elastic­ large amount of asphalt material that can seal
ity in the bonding of asphalt to hold the stones small cracks The asphalt-aggregate treatments
more tightly and reduce the tackiness on the provide the most crack sealing, while the fog
surface seal provides very little crack sealing The use
(4) Slurry Seal The slurry seal application con­ of rubberized asphalt provides one of the best
sists of a diluted emulsion mixed with a sand- materials for bridging cracks and maintaining
size aggregate in a special mixer This slurry is an effective seal The exclusion of moisture
then squeegeed onto the pavement surface The from cracks extends life, and may actually help
thickness of the slurry seal is generally less maintain the structural capacity of the pave­
than 3/8 inches ment
(5) Fog Seal A fog seal is an application of dilute (3) Waterproofing The porosity of asphalt pave­
emulsion with no aggregate It seals the sur­ ments varies and may admit water to some ex­
face and provides a small amount of rejuvena­ tent through the normal void structure The
tion It also provides a very distinct delineation application of a waterproof surface will restrict
between mainline pavement and the shoulder, moisture infiltration and reduce the rate of
where they are primarily used, on high-volume deterioration in existing pavements
roads (4) Improve Friction Resistance The use of an
(6) Sand Seal A sand seal consists of a spray ap­ open-graded friction course reduces the wet
plication of emulsion with a light covering of weather accident potential of a pavement by
sand or screening This application serves the reducing the potential for hydroplaning The
same function as a fog seal, but it provides a aggregate in a standard surface treatment can
more friction-resistant surface The appear­ directly increase the skid resistance of a pave­
ance of a sand seal surface does not provide the ment The aggregate used in the surface treat­
dramatic delineation that a fog seal does ment must be controlled to ensure the level of
(7) Road Oiling Road oiling is primarily a dust friction resistance remains high following
palliative measure for low-volume, unsurfaced construction
roads Dilute asphalt materials are applied to (5) Reduce Weathering Effects The asphalt appli­
hold the dust down on the surface The oil may cation adds softer asphalt material to the oxi­
be mixed into the surface material with a disc dized surface of the pavement and retards the
and, after extensive time, provide a weather- hardening of the original asphalt surface The
resistant surface extra material provided by the asphalt reduces
the voids on the surface of the pavement and
Functions o f Seals or Surface Treatments. Sur­ deters the entry of water and air, which tends
face treatments may provide an extension to the to harden the asphalt Fog and slurry seals are
service life of a pavement and reduce required mainte­ effective in areas where excessive oxidation
nance expenditures until a more cost-effective rehabil­ and hardening of the asphalt in the mixture are
itation program can be developed The major a common problem
functions of surface treatments are (6) Improve Surface Appearance In some in­
stances, the general appearance of the pave­
(1) Provide a Wearing Surface An asphalt-aggre­ ment surface may be quite disorderly due to
gate surface treatment provides a new aggre­ patching and other construction activities A
gate exposed to the traffic, which can furnish surface treatment is a simple, effective means
♦ter durability and wear characteristics than of covering these irregularities and providing a
•final surface This application generally uniform appearance to the surface
s e friction resistance, but improve- (7) Visual Delineation A distinct difference in the
durability may not always visual appearance of the shoulder and
/e g a te to be used to correct a the mainline pavement is an aid to motorists
yiirface should be tested thor­ Studies have shown that when this distinction
Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay 111-73

exists, the drivers avoid driving on the lane/ The physical condition of the surface influences the
shoulder joint, increasing the life of the pave­ amount of asphalt material needed in the surface treat­
ment A difference in the appearance and ment or seal coat If the surface is flushed or bleeding,
texture of the shoulder is a safety enhancement the amount of asphalt used should be reduced to com­
for the pavement as a whole pensate for the excess already present If the surface is
(8) Structural There is no direct structural benefit oxidized and very porous, the amount used should be
derived from the application of a surface treat­ increased because the surface will absorb some of the
ment Multiple surface treatments of three or asphalt added during construction This absorption
more layers appears, however, to provide some effectively takes asphalt away from the aggregate in
structure to the pavement, but no mixture test­ the surface treatment Recommendations are shown in
ing is performed The aggregate used is not Table 4 3 These are only recommendations, and will
uniformly graded to ensure aggregate interlock vary depending upon local experience and conditions
and, therefore, cannot resist deformation under If these alterations are ignored, the application rates
heavy load repetitions Thus, a surface treat­ of the asphalt material will be improper Factors rela­
ment cannot properly be considered a struc­ tive to the type of asphalt and aggregate materials
tural improvement to a pavement, although selected, as well as the specific design quantities to
some marginal improvements may occur It use, are a direct function of the material and construc­
can reduce the rate of deterioration of a pave­ tion specifications of the user agency Appropriate
ment by sealing cracks and preventing the user agency information regarding these design,
infiltration of water into the pavement and, material, and construction specifications should be
thereby, delay the need for structural improve­ followed
ments Hence, a surface treatment can make an
indirect contribution to the structural adequacy
of the pavement 4.3.10 Prediction of Life of R ehabilitation
Techniques W ithout Overlay
General Design Concepts fo r Surface Treatments
or Seal Coats. There are two components to be con­ All pavements deteriorate over time due to traffic
sidered in the design of a surface treatment or seal loadings, climatic effects, and other causes It is ex­
coat the asphalt material and the aggregate The gen­ tremely important to be able to predict the deteriora­
eral design considerations are similar for all types of tion of pavements (and thus their service life) both in
surface treatments Actual design procedures for sur­ the first performance period after construction or
face treatments are widely available in literature and reconstruction, and after one or more rehabilitations
each agency must evaluate the available procedures to
ensure they will work with local materials In general, Need fo r Performance Prediction Models. The
the engineer must consider the following to ensure ability to predict the life of a pavement rehabilitation
that the surface treatment will perform successfully strategy is essential to conduct life-cycle cost analyses
Existing Pavement Structure
Available Materials (Asphalt and Aggregate)
Quantity Selection Table 4.3. Recom m endations for Changes in
Local Condition and Experience Asphalt for Surface Texture
If the existing pavement is not structurally suffic­ Increase in
ient to carry the projected traffic for 3 to 5 years, a Application Rate
surface treatment should not be considered The pave­ Surface Condition (gal/yd2)
ment should be scheduled for another form of more
Black, flushed, bleeding - 0 01 to - 0 06
extensive rehabilitation because surface treatments are
( —0 3 average)
not designed to withstand traffic in excess of the ca­
Smooth, non-porous 0 00
pacity of the underlying pavement If the underlying
Absorbent:
pavement has any structural problems resulting from
Slightly open, oxidized + 0 03
poor drainage or an unstable base, surface treatments
Raveled, open, oxidized + 0 06
should not be considered These deficiencies should
Severe weathering, raveling,
be noted during the survey and evaluation phase of
oxidized + 0 09
project development
111-74 Design of Pavement Structures

and to make any rational decisions as to the best reha­ previously listed factors for new pavements, plus the
bilitation strategy This section briefly summarizes amount, type, design, and construction quality of
existing experience and capabilities for predicting the rehabilitation work performed The performance of a
life of rehabilitation techniques without overlay Pre­ rehabilitated concrete pavement is illustrated in Figure
diction of the life of a pavement in its first perform­ 4 1, which is the same example noted in Table 4 4 It
ance period is described to demonstrate the concepts is assumed that concrete pavement restoration work is
of life prediction performed after 10 million 18-kip ESAL’s including:
Various prediction models have been developed for subsealing voids, subdrainage, full-depth repairs to
both new flexible and rigid pavements based on field joints and cracks, and grinding and resealing of joints
performance data that relate the key design and cli­ The curves illustrate the potential future performance
matic factors to several major distress types and serv­ of the pavement using the same models with some
iceability Each distress and serviceability has a modifications
distinct functional relationship Models should be developed to provide this predic­
When a pavement is rehabilitated, the existing tive capability to assist the engineer in determining the
pavement condition or amount of deterioration is cost-effectiveness of these rehabilitation strategies
modified depending on the work performed Rehabili­ Present state of the art for predicting the performance
tation work may repair some or most of the existing of pavements rehabilitated without an overlay is essen­
deterioration Therefore, the future rate of deteriora­ tially limited to engineering judgment, along with a
tion of the rehabilitated pavement depends on all of the few observations of field performance

Table 4.4. Inputs and Predicted O utputs for a Specific Pavement Section
Using Example Models
Design/Clim ate Factors
Type of pavement Jointed reinforced concrete
Cumulative traffic (ESAL) 1 0 million per year (design lane)
Subgrade type Fine-grained
Base type Granular
Modulus of subgrade reaction 200 pci (top of base course)
Slab thickness 9 inches
Durability of PCC aggregates Non-susceptible to “ D ” cracking
Design modulus of PCC rupture 650 psi
Reinforcement 0 10 sq in /ft width
Joint spacing 40 ft
Dowel diameter 1 25 inches
Type of joint seal Hot pour
Shoulders Asphalt concrete
Subdrainage None
Average annual precipitation 33 inches (85 cm)
COE Freezing Index 625 degree days below freezing
Predicted—Perform ance
Age Joint
(years) ESAL Pum ping Faulting Cracking Deterioration PSR
0 0 0 0 00 0 0 4 5
5 5 17 0 06 301 2 3 3
10 10 27 0 11 1,055 11 2 8
15 15 30 0 15 1,904 27 2 5
20 20 30 0 17 2,628 52 2 2
tatio Methods Other Than Overlay III
JRCP - M id w e st Location

02

0 1

000

000

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20

ESAL - 106
ure 4.1. Illustration of Pavement Perform ance after R ehabilitation w ithout Overlay
m -76 Design of Pavement Structures

Life o f Selected Rehabilitation Alternatives. 1 year A typical life expectancy for high type
Some published information and data exists on the life sealants and good construction techniques is
of different rehabilitation techniques other than over­ 4 to 10 years or more
lays A description of available information is given (5) Diamond Grinding The life o f diamond
for a few key techniques: grinding of concrete pavements depends pri­
marily on traffic loading, the hardness of the
(1) Full-Depth Repair The life of full-depth re­
aggregate, and the lane width of the grinding
pairs depends on the following factors: load
fins The oldest diamond grinding projects
transfer capability of the transverse joints,
have lasted more than 15 years in California
foundation support (pumping of the existing
The actual life depends more on the deteriora­
slab near the joints), climate, traffic loading
tion of pavement components other than the
level, quality of construction, length of repair,
surface, such as joints, faulting, and cracking
soundness of existing PCC, and sealing of
Thus, the life of the overall pavement depends
transverse repair joints Full-depth repairs, as
heavily on concurrent rehabilitation work per­
old as 15 years, have received over 10 million formed at the time of grinding to prevent or
ESAL’s Others have failed in as little as 1 year
minimize further deterioration The typical
due to poor design and/or construction A typ­ life expectancy for diamond grinding is 8 to 15
ical life expectancy is 5 to 15 years under years where concurrent rehabilitation work is
heavy traffic performed to prevent or minimize future dete­
(2) Partial-Depth Repair. The life of partial-depth rioration (e g , subdrainage, sealing joints,
patching depends on the following factors: subsealing)
soundness of surrounding PCC, restoration of (6) Surface Treatments There are a variety of sur­
the transverse joint near the patch, patch face treatments available, and each has its own
materials used, construction procedures (par­ distinctive performance characteristics and
ticularly damage to the existing PCC), and service life The level of traffic and condition
bonding agent used Partial-depth repairs, up of pavement prior to the placement of the sur­
to 5 years of age, have been performing satis­ face treatment are extremely important Ob­
factorily Others have failed in as little as a few served life for several surface treatments are
months due to poor construction practices A provided below for pavements that have typi­
typical life expectancy is 3 to 8 years cally low-to-medium traffic levels
(3) Subsealing o f Slabs to Fill Voids The life of
slab subsealing depends on factors such as
traffic level, adequacy to which existing voids Observed Life
were filled, quality of subseal material, pre­ Surface Treatm ent (years)
vention of free moisture beneath the slab/sub­ Single chip seal 3 to 5
base, annual precipitation, and load transfer in Double chip seal 4 to 6
slab which controls corner deflection Sub­ Slurry seal 3 to 5
sealing has been observed to perform satisfac­ Rubberized chip seal 3 to 8
torily for up to 5 years or more Other jobs Fog or rejuvenation seal 1 to 3
have started pumping almost immediately A Open-graded friction course 3 to 7
typical life expectancy is 4 to 8 years for heavy
traffic conditions
(4) Joint Resealing The life of joint resealing de­ (7) Pressure Relief Joints The life of a pressure
pends primarily on the quality of the sealant relief joint depends on the buildup of pressure
(durability, extensibility, e tc ), the design of in the pavement This is a function of the
the sealant reservoir, and the construction amount of incompressibles that have infiltrated
techniques used Joint resealing, using the into the joints and cracks, and the width of the
high quality sealants (elastomers, silicones, pressure relief joint The observed life of pres­
preformed compression), has performed well sure relief joints is 1 to 5 years, and then they
from 4 to 10 years when designed and con­ close tightly and need to be resawed Typical
structed properly Where typical types of life is on the order of 4 years
hot-poured sealants or poor construction pro­ (8) Subdrainage The life of subdrainage (longitu­
cedures are used, the life has been less than dinal drains) depends greatly on the design of
Rehabilitation Methods Other Than Overlay 111-77

the filter material and pipe Drains have been where

placed that are over 15 years old and still func­
tion (assuming that the outlets are kept clean) FAULT Transverse joint faulting, in X
However, other drains have become clogged 1,000 (mils),
within 1 to 2 years due to poor design of the ESAL Accumulated equivalent 18-kip
filter material Actually, assuming proper de­ single axle loads to lane,
sign of the filter material and piping, drains LENGTH Length of full-depth repair, ft ,
can be cleaned easily using high-pressure DOWEL 0, no dowel bars,
water Thus, the life expectancy of well-de­ 1, dowel bars,
signed subdrains where cleaning is performed UCUT 0, not an undercut type repair,
is on the order of 10 to 20 years 1, undercut type repair,
PRECIP Average annual precipitation, in ,
and
Development o f Predictive Models fo r Rehabilita­
FREEZE Freezing Index, degree days below
tion Pavements. The rate of deterioration of pave­
freezing
ments after they have been rehabilitated by methods
other than overlay may be greater or less than the rate
Graphs in Figure 4 2 illustrate the functional form
of deterioration during their first performance cycle
and sensitivity of this prediction model Models could
Through the measurements of field performance for
be developed for all types of rehabilitation techniques
different rehabilitation techniques, it should be possi­
ble to develop predictive models for distress and serv­ by selecting and measuring the factors likely to affect
iceability for local regions As follows, a predictive their service life, and then developing empirical-
model was developed for faulting of full-depth repairs mechanistic prediction models The models must
using data from repairs located in the Midwest (model include key factors that affect the service life of reha­
has not been validated) bilitation techniques While the state of the art of such
predictive models is poor for rehabilitated pavements,
each agency is strongly encouraged to initiate data
FAULT = (ESAL/1 3)°478 collection schemes to obtain needed information to
eventually develop such models Until such time, at­
* ( - 0 3679 + 0 0078 LENGTH1537 tempts to fully utilize life-cycle cost concepts for se­
lecting the most economic rehabilitation alternative
- 2 389 DOWEL - 2 928 UCUT
must be tempered by a significant amount of subjec­
+ 0 285 PRECIP0 970 + 1 40E-7 FREEZE2 256) tiveness
111-78 Design o f Pavement Structures

400

300
( m ils )

200
FAULTING

100

E jqKSAL Repetitions x 10

Figure 4.2. Sensitivity and Functional Form of Full-Depth R epair Faulting Model
 CHAPTER 5
REHABILITATION METHODS WITH OVERLAYS

Overlays are used to remedy functional or struc­ The procedures described in this chapter address
tural deficiencies of existing pavements It is im­ the following types of overlays and existing pave­
portant that the designer consider the type of deteri­ ments
oration present in determining whether the pavement
has a functional or structural deficiency, so that an
appropriate overlay type and design can be devel­ Section Overlay Existing Pavement
oped
54 AC AC
Functional deficiency arises from any conditions
55 AC Break/crack and seat
that adversely affect the highway user These include
and rubblized PCC
poor surface friction and texture, hydroplaning and
56 AC JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP
splash from wheel path rutting, and excess surface
57 AC AC/JPCP, AC/JRCP,
distortion (e g , potholes, corrugation, faulting, blow­
and AC/CRCP
ups, settlements, heaves) The overlay design proce­
dures in this chapter address structural deficiencies If 5 8 Bonded PCC JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP
a pavement has only a functional deficiency, proce­ 59 Unbonded PCC JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP
dures in Part III, Chapter 4 and Section 5 3 2 should 5 10 PCC AC
be used
Structural deficiency arises from any conditions
that adversely affect the load-carrying capability of
the pavement structure These include inadequate 5.1 OVERLAY TY PE FEA SIB ILITY
thickness as well as cracking, distortion, and disinte­
gration It should be noted that several types of dis­ The feasibility of any type of overlay depends on
tress (e g , distresses caused by poor construction the following major considerations
techniques, low-temperature cracking) are not ini­
tially caused by traffic loads but do become more (1) Availability of adequate funds for construction
severe under traffic to the point that they also detract of the overlay This is basically a constraint, as
from the load-carrying capability of the pavement illustrated in Part III, Figure 2 1
Part III, Section 4 1 2 provides descriptions of various (2) Construction feasibility of the overlay This in­
structural conditions cludes several aspects
Maintenance overlays and surface treatments are (a) Traffic control
sometimes placed as preventive measures to slow the (b) Materials and equipment availability
rate of deterioration of pavements This type of treat­ (c) Climatic conditions
ment includes thin AC overlays and various surface (d) Construction problems such as noise,
treatments which help keep out moisture pollution, subsurface utilities, overhead
The following abbreviations for pavement and bridge clearance, shoulder thickness and
overlay types are used in this chapter side slope extensions in the case of lim­
AC: Asphalt concrete ited right-of-way, etc
PCC: Portland cement concrete (e) Traffic disruptions and user delay costs
JPCP Jointed plain concrete pavement (3) Required future design life of the overlay
JRCP: Jointed reinforced concrete pavement Many factors will affect the life of an overlay,
CRCP Continuously reinforced concrete such as the following
pavement (a) Existing pavement deterioration (spe­
AC/PCC AC-overlaid Portland cement concrete cific distress types, severities, and quan­
(JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP) tities)

111-79
111-80 Design o f Pavement Structures

(b) Existing pavement design, condition of tive than doing extensive preoverlay repair Excellent
pavement materials (especially durability guidelines are available on preoverlay repair tech­
problems), and subgrade soil niques (1, 2, 3, 4)
(c) Future traffic loadings
(d) Local climate
(e) Existing subdrainage situation 5.2.2 Reflection C rack C ontrol

All of these factors and others specific to the site need Reflection cracks are a frequent cause of overlay
to be considered to determine the suitability of an deterioration The thickness design procedures in this
overlay chapter do not consider reflection cracking Addi­
tional steps must be taken to reduce the occurrence
and severity of reflection cracking Some overlays are
less susceptible to reflection cracking than others be­
5.2 IM PORTANT CONSIDERATIONS IN cause of their materials and design Similarly, some
OVERLAY DESIGN reflection crack control measures are more effective
with some pavement and overlay types than with
Overlay design requires consideration of many dif­ others Reflection crack control is discussed in more
ferent items, including: preoverlay repair, reflection detail in the sections for each overlay type
crack control, traffic loadings, subdrainage, milling
an existing AC surface, recycling portions of an exist­
ing pavement, structural versus functional overlay 5.2.3 Traffic Loadings
needs, overlay materials, shoulders, rutting in an ex­
isting AC pavement and overlay, durability of PCC The overlay design procedures require the 18-kip
slabs, design of joints, reinforcement, and bonding/ equivalent single-axle loads (ESALs) expected over
separation layers for PCC overlays, overlay design re­ the design life of the overlay in the design lane The
liability level and overall standard deviation, and estimated ESALs must be calculated using the appro­
pavement widening priate flexible pavement or rigid pavement equiva­
These considerations must not be overlooked by the lency factors from Part II of this Guide The ap­
designer Each of these is briefly described in this propriate type of equivalency factors for each overlay
section, especially those that are common for all over­ type and existing pavement type are given in the fol­
lay types They are described in more detail in the lowing table
sections for each overlay type
Equivalency
Existing Overlay Factors
Pavement Type to Use
5.2.1 Pre-overlay R epair
Flexible AC Flexible
Deterioration in the existing pavement includes vis­ Rubblized PCC AC Flexible
ible distress as well as damage which is not visible at Break/ Crack/Seat AC Flexible
the surface but which may be detected by other means JRCP, JRCP
How much of this distress should be repaired before Jointed PCC AC or PCC Rigid
an overlay is placed? The amount of pre-overlay repair CRCP AC or PCC Rigid
needed is related to the type of overlay selected If Flexible PCC Rigid
distress in the existing pavement is likely to affect the Composite (AC/PCC) AC or PCC Rigid
performance of the overlay within a few years, it
should be repaired prior to placement of the overlay
Much of the deterioration that occurs in overlays An approximate correlation exists between ESALs
results from deterioration that was not repaired in the computed using flexible pavement and rigid pavement
existing pavements The designer should also consider equivalency factors Converting from rigid pavement
the cost tradeoffs of preoverlay repair and overlay ESALs to flexible pavement ESALs requires multiply­
type If the existing pavement is severely deteriorated, ing the rigid pavement ESALs by 0 67 For example,
selecting an overlay type which is less sensitive to 15 million rigid pavement ESALs equal 10 million
existing pavement condition may be more cost-effec­ flexible pavement ESALs Five million flexible pave­
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-81

ment ESALs equal 7 5 million rigid pavement ESALs rial Significant rutting or other major distortion of
Failure to utilize the correct type of ESALs will result any layer should be removed by milling before another
in significant errors in the overlay designs Conver­ overlay is placed, otherwise, it may contribute signifi­
sions must be made, for example, when designing an cantly to rutting of the overlay
AC overlay of a flexible pavement (flexible ESALs
required) and when designing an alternative PCC
overlay of the same flexible pavement (rigid ESALs 5.2.7 Recycling the Existing Pavement
required) Throughout this chapter, ESALs are desig­
nated as rigid ESALs or flexible ESALs as appro­ Recycling a portion of an existing AC layer may be
priate considered as an option in the design of an overlay
The type of ESALs used in the overlay design de­ This has become a very common practice Complete
pends on the pavement performance model (flexible recycling of the AC layer may also be done (some­
or rigid) being used In the overlay design procedures times in conjunction with the removal of a deteriorated
presented in this chapter, the flexible pavement model base course)
is used in designing AC overlays of AC pavements and
fractured slab PCC pavements The rigid pavement
model is used in designing AC and PCC overlays of 5.2.8 Structural versus Functional Overlays
PCC and ACC/PCC pavements and PCC overlays of
AC pavements The overlay design procedures in this chapter pro­
vide an overlay thickness to correct a structural defi­
ciency If no structural deficiency exists, an overlay
5.2.4 Subdrainage thickness less than or equal to zero will be obtained
This does not mean, however, that the pavement does
The subdrainage condition of an existing pavement not need an overlay to correct a functional deficiency
usually has a great influence on how well the overlay If the deficiency is primarily functional, then the over­
performs A subdrainage evaluation of the existing lay thickness should be only that which is needed to
pavement should be conducted as described in Part III, remedy the functional problem (6) If the pavement
Section 3 3 Further guidance is provided in Refer­ has a structural deficiency as well, a structural overlay
ence 5 Improving poor subdrainage conditions will thickness which is adequate to carry future traffic over
have a beneficial effect on the performance of an over­ the design period is needed
lay Removal of excess water from the pavement cross-
section will reduce erosion and increase the strength
of the base and subgrade, which in turn will reduce 5.2.9 Overlay Materials
deflections In addition, stripping in AC pavement and
“ D ” cracking in PCC pavement may be slowed by The overlay materials must be selected and de­
improved subdrainage signed to function within the specific loading, climatic
conditions, and underlying pavement deficiencies
present
5.2.5 Rutting in AC Pavements

The cause of rutting in an existing AC pavement 5.2.10 Shoulders

must be determined before an AC overlay is designed
An overlay may not be appropriate if severe rutting is Overlaying traffic lanes generally requires that the
occurring due to instability in any of the existing pave­ shoulders be overlaid to match the grade line of the
ment layers Milling can be used to remove the rutted traffic lanes In selecting an overlay material and
surface and any underlying rutted asphalt layers. thickness for the shoulder, the designer should con­
sider the extent to which the existing shoulder is dete­
riorated and the amount of traffic that will use the
5.2.6 Milling AC Surface shoulder For example, if trucks tend to park on the
shoulder at certain locations, this should be consid­
The removal of a portion of an existing AC surface ered in the shoulder overlay design
frequently improves the performance of an AC overlay If an existing shoulder is in good condition, any
due to the removal of cracked and hardened AC mate­ deteriorated areas should be patched An overlay may
111-82 Design of Pavement Structures

then be placed to match the shoulder grade to that of or Df) required to carry traffic over the design period
the traffic lanes If an existing shoulder is in such poor at the desired level of reliability
condition that it cannot be patched economically, it Reliability level has a large effect on overlay thick­
should be removed and replaced ness Varying the reliability level used to determine
SNf or Df between 50 and 99 percent may produce
overlay thicknesses varying by 6 inches or more (8)
5.2.11 Existing PCC Slab Durability Based on field testing, it appears that a design reliabil­
ity level of approximately 95 percent gives overlay
The durability of an existing PCC slab greatly in­ thicknesses consistent with those recommended for
fluences the performance of AC and bonded PCC most projects by State highway agencies, when the
overlays If “ D ” cracking or reactive aggregate exists, overall standard deviations recommended in Part I and
the deterioration of the existing slab can be expected II are used (8) There are, of course, many situations
to continue after overlay The overlay must be de­ for which it is desirable to design at a higher or lower
signed with this progressive deterioration of the un­ level of reliability, depending on the consequences of
derlying slab in mind (7) failure of the overlay The level of reliability to be used
for different types of overlays may vary, and should be
evaluated by each agency for different highway func­
5.2.12 PCC Overlay Joints tional classifications (or traffic volumes)
The designer should be aware that some sources of
Bonded or unbonded jointed concrete overlays re­ uncertainty are different for overlay design than for
quire special joint design that considers the character­ new pavement design Therefore, the overall standard
istics (e g , stiffness) of the underlying pavement deviations recommended for new pavement design
Factors to be considered include joint spacing, depth may not be appropriate for overlay design The appro­
of saw cut, sealant reservoir shape, and load transfer priate value for overall standard deviation may vary by
requirements overlay type as well An additional source of variation
is the uncertainty associated with establishing the ef­
fective existing structural capacity (SNeff or Deff)
5.2.13 PCC Overlay Reinforcement However, some sources of variation may be smaller
for overlay design than for new pavement design (e g ,
Jointed reinforced and continuously reinforced estimation of future traffic) Additional research is
concrete overlays require an adequate amount of rein­ needed to better establish the standard deviations for
forcement to hold cracks together Friction between overlay design At the present time it is recommended
the overlay slab and the base slab should be consid­ to use 0 39 for any type of concrete overlay and 0 49
ered in the reinforcement design for any type of AC overlay, which is consistent with
Part I, Section 4 3

5.2.14 PCC Overlay Bonding/Separation Layers

The bonding or separation of concrete overlays 5.2.16 Pavement Widening

must be fully considered Bonded overlays must be
constructed to insure that the overlay remains bonded Many AC overlays are placed over PCC pavements
to the existing slab Unbonded overlays must be con­ in conjunction with pavement widening (either adding
structed to insure that the separation layer prevents lanes or adding width to a narrow lane) If multiple
any reflection cracks in the overlay lane widening is to be designed, refer to Part II for
guidance Widening requires coordination between
the design of the widened pavement section and the
5.2.15 Overlay Design Reliability Level and overlay, not only so that the surface will be function­
Overall Standard Deviation ally adequate, but also so that both the existing and
widening sections will be structurally adequate Many
An overlay may be designed for different levels of lane widening projects have developed serious deteri­
reliability using the procedures described in Part I, oration along the longitudinal joint due to improper
Chapter 4 for new pavements This is accomplished design The key design recommendations are as fol­
through determination of the structural capacity (SNf lows:
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-83

(1) The design “ lives” of both the overlay and the should be reviewed for overlay designs
new widening construction should be the same by each agency, since the recommenda­
to avoid the need for future rehabilitation at tions given in Part I are intended for new
significantly different ages pavement designs See Section 5 2 15
(2) The widened cross section should generally for discussion of overlay design relia­
closely match the existing pavement or cross bility
section in material type, thickness, reinforce­ (b) Overall standard deviation, S0 The val­
ment, and joint spacing However, a shorter ues recommended for new pavement de­
joint spacing may be used sign may be either too low or too high for
(3) A widened PCC slab section must be tied with overlay design See Section 5 2 15 for
deformed bars to the existing PCC slab face discussion of overall standard deviation
The tie bars should be securely anchored and (c) Effective slab thickness and structural
consistent with ties used in new pavement con­ number adjustment factors There are
struction (e g , No 5 bars, 30 inches long, many aspects to these that may need
grouted and spaced no more than 30 inches agency adjustment
apart) (d) Design subgrade resilient modulus and
(4) A reflection crack relief fabric may be placed effective k-value Specifically, a resilient
along the longitudinal widening joint modulus which is consistent with that in­
(5) The overlay should generally be the same corporated into the flexible pavement de­
thickness over the widening section as over the sign equation in Part II, Section 5 4 5
rest of the traffic lane must be used
(6) Longitudinal subdrainage should be placed if (e) Other design inputs may be in error
needed Ranges of typical values for inputs are
given in the worksheets for overlay de­
sign
5.2.17 Potential Errors and Possible
Adjustments to Thickness
Design Procedure 5.2.18 Example Designs and Documentation

The overlay thicknesses obtained using these pro­ Reference 8 provides many examples of overlay de­
cedures should be reasonable when the pavement has a signs for pavements in different regions of the United
structural deficiency If the overlay thickness appears States These may provide the designer with valuable
to be unreasonable, one or more of the following insight into results obtained for actual projects Refer­
causes may be responsible ence 9 contains documentation for the concepts in­
volved in the overlay design procedures
(1) The pavement deterioration may be caused pri­
marily by nonload-associated factors A com­
puted overlay thickness less than zero or close
5.3 PAVEMENT EVALUATION FOR
to zero suggests that the pavement does not
OVERLAY DESIGN
need a structural improvement If a functional
deficiency exists, a minimum constructible
It is important that an evaluation of the existing
overlay thickness that addresses the problem
pavement be conducted to identify any functional and
could be placed
structural deficiencies, and to select appropriate pre­
(2) Modifications may be needed in the overlay
overlay repair, reflection crack treatments and overlay
design inputs to customize the procedures to
designs to correct these deficiencies This section pro­
the agency’s specific conditions Each agency
vides guidance in pavement evaluation for overlay de­
should test the overlay design procedures on
sign
actual projects to investigate the need for mod­
The following sections of Part III of this Guide
ifications Reference 8 contains many example
provide information on pavement evaluation for reha­
overlay designs that illustrate typical inputs
bilitation
and outputs
(a) Overlay reliability design level, R The Section 2 3 Selection of Alternative
recommended design reliability levels Rehabilitation Methods
111-84 Design o f Pavement Structures

Chapter 3 Guides for Field Data Collection sis point along the entire project for a given
Chapter 4: Rehabilitation Methods Other reliability level In selecting one thickness for
Than Overlay (portions of this chapter are the uniform section, be aware that each overlay
applicable to preoverlay pavement thickness has already been increased to ac­
evaluation and preoverlay repair) count for the design reliability level Selection
of a thickness that is greater than the mean of
The guidelines and procedures in these chapters are
these values would be designing for a higher
not repeated in this section, but are referenced as
level of reliability The point by point overlay
needed This section provides guidelines for pavement
thicknesses can be used to divide the project
evaluation specifically for overlay design purposes
into different overlay design thickness sections
Further details are provided in the sections for design
if systematic variation exists along the project,
of each overlay type
or one design thickness can be selected for the
entire project Areas having unusually high
thickness requirements may be targeted for ad­
5.3.1 Design of Overlay Along Project
ditional field investigation, and may warrant
extensive repair or reconstruction
Pavement rehabilitation projects involve lengths of
pavement that range from a few hundred feet to several
miles There are two approaches to designing an over­
lay thickness for a project, and both have advantages
5.3.2 Functional Evaluation of
and disadvantages The design engineer should select
Existing Pavement
the approach that best fits the specific design situa­
tion
Functional deterioration is defined as any condition
(1) Uniform Section Approach The project is di­ that adversely affects the highway user Some recom­
vided into sections of relatively uniform design mended overlay solutions to functional problems are
and condition Each uniform section is consid­ provided (also see table on next page)
ered independently and overlay design inputs
are obtained from each section that represents (1) Surface Friction and Hydroplaning
its average condition (e g , mean thicknesses,
All pavement types Poor wet-weather
mean number of transverse cracks per mile,
friction due to polishing of the surface (inade­
mean resilient modulus) Identification of uni­
quate macrotexture and/or microtexture) A
form sections is described in Part III, Section
thin overlay that is adequate for the traffic level
3 2 2 The mean inputs for the section are used
may be used to remedy this problem Guide­
to obtain a single overlay thickness for the en­
lines for use of asphalt concrete friction
tire length of the section The mean inputs
courses are provided in Reference 10
must be used in the AASHTO design proce­
AC-surfaced pavement Poor friction due to
dure because design reliability is applied later
bleeding of the surface Milling the AC surface
to give the appropriate safety factor
may be required to remove the material that is
(2) Point-By-Point Approach Overlay thicknesses
bleeding to prevent further bleeding through
are determined for specific points along the
the overlay, and to prevent rutting due to insta­
uniform design section (e g , every 300 feet)
bility After milling, an open-graded friction
All required inputs are determined for each
course or an overlay thickness adequate for the
point so that the overlay thickness can be de­
traffic level may be used to remedy this prob­
signed Factors that may change from point to
lem
point include deflection, thickness, and condi­
AC-surfaced pavement Hydroplaning and
tion, other inputs are usually fairly constant
splashing due to wheel path rutting Determin­
along the project This approach may appear to
ing which layer or layers are rutting and taking
require much more work, however, in reality it
appropriate corrective action are important
does not require much additional field work,
only more runs through the design procedure (2) Surface Roughness
This can be done efficiently using a computer
The point-by-point approach produces a re­ All pavement types Long wavelength sur­
quired overlay design thickness for each analy­ face distortion, including heaves and swells A
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-85

Cause o f Rutting Layer(s) Causing Rut Solution

Total pavement thickness inadequate Subgrade Thick overlay
Unstable granular layer due to saturation Base or subbase Remove unstable layer or thick overlay
Unstable layer due to low shear strength Base Remove unstable layer or thick overlay
Unstable AC mix (including stripping) Surface Remove unstable layer
Compaction by traffic Surface, base, subbase Surface milling and/or leveling overlay
Studded tire wear Surface Surface milling and/or leveling overlay

level-up overlay with varying thickness (ade­ gineering, and requires experience in solving the spe­
quate thickness on crests) usually corrects cific problems involved The overlay design required
these problems to correct functional problems should be coordinated
AC-surfaced pavement Roughness from with that required to correct any structural deficien­
deteriorated transverse cracks, longitudinal cies
cracks, and potholes A conventional overlay
will correct the roughness only temporarily,
until the cracks reflect through the overlay 5.3.3 Structural Evaluation of
Full-depth repair of deteriorated areas and a Existing Pavement
thicker AC overlay incorporating a reflection
crack control treatment may remedy this prob­ Structural deterioration is defined as any condition
lem that reduces the load-carrying capacity of the pave­
AC-surfaced pavement Roughness from ment The overlay design procedures presented here
ravelling of surface A thin AC overlay could are based on the concept that time and traffic loadings
be used to remedy this problem Milling the reduce a pavement’s ability to carry loads and an over­
existing surface may be required to remove de­ lay can be designed to increase the pavement’s ability
teriorated material to prevent debonding If the to carry loads over a future design period
ravelling is due to stripping, the entire layer Figure 5 1 illustrates the general concepts of struc­
should be removed because the stripping will tural deficiency and effective structural capacity The
continue and may accelerate under an overlay structural capacity of a pavement when new is denoted
PCC-surfaced pavement Roughness from as SCc For flexible pavements, structural capacity is
spalling (including potholes) and faulting of the structural number, SN For rigid pavements, struc­
transverse and longitudinal joints and cracks tural capacity is the slab thickness, D For existing
Spalling can be repaired by full- or partial- composite pavements (AC/PCC) the structural capac­
depth repairs consisting of rigid materials ity is expressed as an equivalent slab thickness
Faulting can be alleviated by an overlay of ade­ The structural capacity of the pavement declines
quate thickness; however, faulting indicates with time and traffic, and by the time an evaluation for
poor load transfer and poor subdrainage Poor overlay design is conducted, the structural capacity
load transfer will lead to spalling of reflected has decreased to SCeff The effective structural capac­
cracks in an AC overlay Subdrainage improve­ ity for each pavement type is expressed as follows
ment may be needed
Flexible pavements SNeff
Some agencies apply what are called “ preventive Rigid and composite pavements Deff
overlays” that are intended to slow the rate of deterio­
ration This type of overlay includes thin AC and vari­ If a structural capacity of SCf is required for the future
ous surface treatments These may be applied to traffic expected during the overlay design period, an
pavements which do not present any immediate func­ overlay having a structural capacity of SCol (i e ,
tional or structural deficiency, but whose condition is SCf - SCeff) must be added to the existing structure
expected to deteriorate rapidly in the future This approach to overlay design is commonly called
Overlay designs (including thickness, preoverlay the structural deficiency approach Obviously, the re­
repairs and reflection crack treatments) must address quired overlay structural capacity can be correct only
the causes of functional problems and prevent their if the evaluation of existing structural capacity is cor­
recurrence This can only be done through sound en­ rect The primary objective of the structural evalua-
111-86 Design o f Pavement Structures

Figure 5.1. Illustration of S tructural Capacity Loss Over Time and with Traffic
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-87

tion is to determine the effective structural capacity of loading, but their severity is increased by load­
the existing pavement ing and thus load-carrying capacity is reduced
If the declining relationship depicted in Figure 5 1 (a) AC-surfaced pavements
were well defined, the evaluation of effective struc­ Fatigue or alligator cracking in the
tural capacity would be quite easy This, however, is ■wheel paths Patching and a structural
not the case No single, specific method exists for overlay are required to prevent this dis­
evaluating structural capacity The evaluation of effec­ tress from recurring
tive structural capacity must consider the current con­ Rutting in the wheel paths
dition of the existing pavement materials, and also Transverse or longitudinal cracks that
consider how those materials will behave in the future develop into potholes
Three alternative evaluation methods are recom­ Localized failing areas where the un­
mended to determine effective structural capacity derlying layers are disintegrating and
causing a collapse o f the AC surface
(1) Structural capacity based on visual survey and (e g , underlying PCC slab with severe
materials testing This involves the assessment “D ” cracking, CRCP punchouts, major
of current conditions based on distress and shear failure o f base course/subgrade,
drainage surveys, and usually some coring and stripping o f AC base course) This is a
testing of materials very difficult problem to repair and an
(2) Structural capacity based on nondestructive investigation should be carried out to de­
deflection testing (NDT) This is a direct evalu­ termine its extent If it is not extensive,
ation of in situ subgrade and pavement stiff­ full-depth PCC repair (when a PCC slab
ness along the project exists), and a structural overlay should
(3) Structural capacity based on fatigue damage remedy the problem If the problem is
from traffic Knowledge of past traffic is used too extensive for full-depth repair, recon­
to assess the existing fatigue damage in the struction or a structural overlay designed
pavement The pavement’s future remaining for the weakest area is required
fatigue life can then be estimated The re­ (b) PCC-surfaced pavements
maining life procedure is most applicable to Deteriorating (spalling or faulting)
pavements which have very little visible deteri­ transverse or longitudinal cracks These
oration cracks usually must be full-depth re­
paired, or they will reflect through the
Because of the uncertainties associated with the de­
overlay This does not apply to unbonded
termination of effective structural capacity, the three
JPCP or JRCP overlays
methods cannot be expected to provide equivalent esti­
Corner breaks at transverse joints or
mates The designer should use all three methods
cracks Must be full-depth repaired with
whenever possible and select the “ best” estimate
a full-lane-width repair (this is not re­
based on his or her judgement There is no substitute
quired for unbonded JPCP or JRCP over­
for solid experience and judgment in this selection
lays)
(1) Structural Capacity Based on Visual Survey Localized failing areas where the
and Materials Testing PCC slab is disintegrating and causing
spalls and potholes (e g , caused by se­
Visual Survey. A key component in the de­ vere “D ” cracking, reactive aggregate,
termination of effective structural capacity is or other durability problems) Overlay
the observation of existing pavement condi­ thickness and preoverlay repair require­
tions The observation should begin with a re­ ments may be prohibitive for some types
view of all information available regarding the of overlays
design, construction, and maintenance history Localized punchouts, primarily in
of the pavement This should be followed by a CRCP Full-depth repair of existing
detailed survey to identify the type, amount, punchouts and placement of a structural
severity, and location of surface distresses overlay will greatly reduce the likelihood
Some of the key distress types that are indi­ of future punchouts
cators of structural deficiencies are listed be­ Subdrainage Survey. A drainage survey
low Some of these are not initially caused by should be coupled with the distress survey The
111-88 Design o f Pavement Structures

objective of the drainage survey is to identify nology When properly applied, NDT can pro­
moisture-related pavement problems and loca­ vide a vast amount of information and analysis
tions where drainage improvements might be at a very reasonable expenditure of time,
effective in improve the existing structure or re­ money, and effort The analyses, however, can
ducing the influence of moisture on the perfor­ be quite sensitive to unknown conditions and
mance of the pavement following the overlay must be performed by knowledgeable, experi­
Coring and Materials Testing Program In enced personnel
addition to a survey of the surface distress, a Within the scope of these overlay design
coring and testing program is recommended to procedures, NDT structural evaluation differs
verify or identify the cause of the observed depending on the type of pavement For rigid
surface distress The locations for coring pavement evaluation, NDT serves three analy­
should be selected following the distress sur­ sis functions: (1) to examine load transfer effi­
vey to assure that all significant pavement con­ ciency at joints and cracks, (2) to estimate the
ditions are represented If NDT is used, the
effective modulus of subgrade reaction (effec­
data from that testing should also be used to
tive k-value), and (3) to estimate the modulus
help select the appropriate sites for coring
of elasticity of the concrete (which provides an
The objective of the coring is to determine
estimate of strength) For flexible pavement
material thicknesses and conditions A great
evaluation, NDT serves two functions: (1) to
deal of information will be gained simply by a
estimate the roadbed soil resilient modulus,
visual inspection of the cored material How­
ever, it should be kept in mind that the coring and (2) to provide a direct estimate of SNeff of
operation causes a disturbance of the material the pavement structure Some agencies use
especially along the cut face of AC material NDT to backcalculate the moduli of the indi­
For example, in some cases coring has been vidual layers of a flexible pavement, and then
known to disguise the presence of stripping use these moduli to estimate SNeff This ap­
Consequently, at least some of the asphalt proach is not recommended for use with these
cores should be split apart to check for strip­ overlay design procedures because it implies
ping and requires a level of sophistication that does
The testing program should be directed to­ not exist with the structural number approach
ward determining how the existing materials to design
compare with similar materials that would be In addition to structural evaluation, NDT
used in a new pavement, how the materials can provide other data useful to the design pro­
may have changed since the pavement was con­ cess Deflection data can be used to quantify
structed, and whether or not the materials are variability along the project and to subdivide
functioning as expected The types of tests to the project into segments of similar structural
be performed will depend on the material types strength The NDT data may also be used in a
and the types of distress observed A typical backcalculation scheme to estimate resilient
testing program might include strength tests modulus values for the various pavement lay­
for AC and PCC cores, gradation tests to look ers Although this procedure does not include
for evidence of degradation and/or contamina­ the use of these values as a part of the struc­
tion of granular materials, and extraction tests tural condition determination, backcalculation
to determine binder contents and gradations of of an unusually low value for any layer should
AC mixes PCC cores exhibiting durability be viewed as a strong indication that a detailed
problems may be examined by a petrographer study of the condition of that layer is needed
to identify the cause of the problem The specific methods for estimating effec­
Specific recommendations on estimating tive structural capacity by NDT analysis are
the effective structural capacity from the dis­
discussed within the sections pertaining to the
tress survey information are given in the sec­
specific overlay types
tions for each overlay type
(2) Structural Capacity Based on (3) Structural Capacity Based on
Nondestructive Deflection Testing Remaining Life

Nondestructive deflection testing is an ex­ The remaining life approach to structural

tremely valuable and rapidly developing tech­ evaluation relies directly on the concepts illus­
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-89

trated in Figure 5 1 This follows a fatigue efficients for those materials in a new pavement SNeff
damage concept that repeated loads gradually of the pavement based on a remaining life analysis
damage the pavement and reduce the number would be:
of additional loads the pavement can carry to
failure At any given time, there may be no
directly observable indication of damage, but S N ^ = CF * SN0
there is a reduction in structural capacity in
terms of the future load-carrying capacity (the
The structural capacity determined by this relation­
number of future loads that the pavement can
ship does not account for any preoverlay repair The
carry)
calculated structural capacity should be viewed as a
To determine the remaining life, the designer must lower limit value and may require adjustment to reflect
determine the actual amount of traffic the pavement the benefits of preoverlay repair
has carried to date and the total amount of traffic the For the remaining life determination, Nj 5 can be
pavement could be expected to carry to “ failure” roughly estimated using the new pavement design
(when serviceability equals 1 5, to be consistent with equations or nomographs, or other equations based on
the AASHO Road Test equations) Both traffic local agency information To be consistent with the
amounts must be expressed in 18-kip ESAL The dif­ AASHO Road Test and the development of these equa­
ference between these values, expressed as a percent­ tions, a failure PSI equal to 1 5 and a reliability of 50
age of the total traffic to “ failure,” is defined as the percent is recommended
remaining life: When using this approach, the designer need not be
alarmed if the traffic to date (Np) is found to exceed
the expected traffic to failure (N, 5) resulting in a cal­
culated negative remaining life When this happens,
the designer could use the minimum value for CF
(0 50), or not use the remaining life approach
where The remaining life approach to determine SNeff or
Deff has some serious deficiencies associated with it
There are four major sources of error:
RL = remaining life, percent
Np = total traffic to date, 18-kip ESAL (1) The predictive capability of the AASHO Road
Nj 5 = total traffic to pavement “ failure” Test equations,
(P2 = 1 5), 18-kip ESAL (2) The large variation in performance typically
observed even among pavements of seemingly
With RL determined, the designer may obtain a identical designs,
condition factor (CF) from Figure 5 2 CF is defined (3) Estimation of past 18-kip ESALs, and
by the equation: (4) Inability to account for the amount of preover­
lay repair to the pavement For pavements with
considerable deterioration, the SNeff or Deff
value obtained from the remaining life method
may be much lower than values obtained from
other methods that adjust for preoverlay re­
where pairs Thus, the remaining life procedure is
most applicable to pavements which have very
little visible deterioration
SCn = pavement structural capacity after Np
ESAL
As a result, this method of determining the remain­
SC0 = original pavement structural capacity ing life of the pavement can in some cases produce
very erroneous results The following two extreme er­
The existing structural capacity may be estimated rors may occur with this approach:
by multiplying the original structural capacity of the
pavement by CF For example, the original structural (1) The remaining life estimate may be extremely
number (SN0) of a flexible pavement may be calcu­ low even though very little load-associated dis­
lated from material thicknesses and the structural co­ tress is present While some fatigue damage
Condition Factor, CF
111-90

Figure 5.2. Relationship Between Condition Factor and Remaining Life

Design o f Pavement Structures
Rehabilitation with Overlays HI-91

can exist in a pavement structure before a sig­ M r = backcalculated subgrade resilient

nificant amount of cracking appears, it cannot modulus, psi
be a large amount of damage, or it would cer­ P = applied load, pounds
tainly be evidenced by a significant amount of dr = measured deflection at radial distance r,
cracking If load-related cracking is present in inches
very small amounts and at a low severity level, r = radial distance at which the deflection is
the pavement has considerable remaining life, measured, inches
regardless of what the traffic-based remaining
life calculation suggests This equation for backcalculating MR is based on
(2) The remaining life estimate may be extremely the fact that, at points sufficiently distant from the
high even though a substantial amount of me­ center of loading, the measured surface deflection is
dium- and high-severity load-related cracking almost entirely due to deformation in the subgrade,
is present In this case, the pavement really has and is also independent of the load radius For practi­
little remaining life cal purposes, the deflection used should be as close as
possible to the loading plate, but must also be suffi­
At any point between these two extremes, the re­
ciently far from the loading plate to satisfy the as­
maining life computed from past traffic may not re­
sumptions inherent in the above equation Guidance is
flect the amount of fatigue damage in the pavement,
provided later in this chapter for selecting the mini­
but discerning this from observed distress may be
mum radial distance for determination of MR
more difficult If the computed remaining life appears
The recommended method for determination of the
to be clearly at odds with the amount and severity of design MR from NDT backcalculation requires an ad­
load-associated distress present, do not use the re­
justment factor (C) to make the value calculated con­
maining life method to compute the structural capacity
sistent with the value used to represent the AASHO
of the existing pavement
subgrade A value for C of no more than 0 33 is rec­
The remaining life approach to determining struc­ ommended for adjustment of backcalculated MR val­
tural capacity is not directly applicable, without modi­
ues to design MR values The resulting equation is
fication, to pavements which have already received
one or more overlays
Design MR = C J

5.3.4 Determination of Design MR

A subgrade MR value of 3,000 psi was used for the
The design subgrade MR may be determined by: (1) AASHO Road Test soil in the development of the flex­
laboratory testing, (2) NDT backcalculation, (3) esti­ ible pavement performance model This value is con­
mation from resilient modulus correlation studies, or sistent with some laboratory tests of soil samples from
(4) original design and construction data Regardless the AASHO Road Test site, as Figure 5 3 illustrates
of the method used, the design MR value must be (11) However, these data also show that the resilient
consistent with the value used in the design perform­ modulus of the AASHO Road Test soil is quite stress-
ance equation for the AASHO Road Test subgrade dependent, increasing rapidly for deviator stresses
This is especially important when MR is determined less than 6 psi The subgrade deviator stress at a radial
by NDT backcalculation The backcalculated value is distance appropriate for use in the equation given
typically too high to be consistent and must be ad­ above for backcalculated MR will almost always be far
justed If M r is not adjusted, the SNf value will be less than 6 psi Thus, the subgrade modulus deter­
unconservative and poor overlay performance can be mined by backcalculation can be expected to be too
expected high to be consistent with the 3,000 psi assumed for
A subgrade MR may be backcalculated from NDT the AASHO subgrade
data using the following equation: This was confirmed by two methods In the first
analysis, MR values backcalculated from deflection
data were compared with MR values obtained from
laboratory tests, for the AASHO Road Test and other
sites (12, 13) The results, which are shown in Figure
5 4, indicate that backcalculated MR values exceed
where laboratory MR values by a factor of three or more In
 111-92 Design o f Pavement Structures

lS T

AASHO
Synrboi W.I K, & K,, ksl P®1
14 — \ El 0-0.8 -1.689 -0504 959 6.38
O 0-0J5 -1551 -0.096 6.07 654
A 0+0.4 -1.785 -0.013 3.61 6.18
o 0+05 -1508 -0.019 357 656
X 0+1.3 -1.331 0.009 E.89 655
12 — \ + 0+15 -0587 0.011 E.43 7.78
Resilient Modulus, Ep, ksl

10

8 -

0 J _ l L
0 5 10 15 2 0 2 5 3 0

Repeated Deviator Stress, <T0, psi

Figure 5.3. AASHO Road Test Subgrade Resilient M odulus Test Results (11)
 Backcalculated MR, ksi
Rehabilitation with Overlays

O
c3

S i
CO
o
Vi

&
111-93

Figure 5.4. Backcalculated Resilient Modulus Versus Laboratory Results on Shelby Tube Samples from the AASHO Road Test Site
Plus Data from Two Additional States
111-94 Design o f Pavement Structures

the second analysis, the ILLI-PAVE finite element 5.4.1 Feasibility

program (1 4 ,1 5 ) was used to compute MRvalues for a
variety of pavement structures and subgrade charac­ An AC overlay is a feasible rehabilitation alterna­
teristics representative of the AASHO Road Test soil tive for an AC pavement except when the condition of
At radial distances appropriate for backcalculation of the existing pavement dictates substantial removal and
Mr , the computed MR values also exceeded the value replacement Conditions under which an AC overlay
of 3,000 psi assumed in development of the AASHO would not be feasible include the following
flexible pavement model by a factor of at least three (1) The amount of high-severity alligator cracking
Similarly, pavement surface deflections computed by is so great that complete removal and replace­
ILLI-PAVE produced backcalculated MR values three ment of the existing surface is dictated
or more times greater than 3,000 psi (2) Excessive surface rutting indicates that the ex­
All of these analyses suggest that for the soils ex­ isting materials lack sufficient stability to pre­
amined, backcalculated MR values should be multi­ vent recurrence of severe rutting
plied by an adjustment factor C of no more than 0 33 (3) An existing stabilized base shows signs of seri­
in order to obtain MR values appropriate for use in ous deterioration and would require an inordi­
design with the AASHTO flexible pavement model nate amount of repair to provide uniform
The analyses described here pertain to the fine­ support for the overlay
grained, stress-sensitive soil at the AASHO Road Test (4) An existing granular base must be removed
site plus fine-grained soil from seven other projects and replaced due to infiltration of and contami­
No attempt has been made in this study to investigate nation by a soft subgrade
the relationship between backcalculated and labora­ (5) Stripping in the existing AC surface dictates
tory M r values for granular subgrades It may be that that it should be removed and replaced
backcalculated MR values for granular subgrades
would not require a correction factor as large as is
required for cohesive subgrades However, this sub­ 5.4.2 Pre-overlay Repair
ject requires further research
Users are cautioned that the resilient modulus The following types of distress should be repaired
value selected has a very significant effect on the re­ prior to overlay of AC pavements If they are not re­
sulting structural number determined Therefore, us­ paired, the service life of the overlay will be greatly
ers should be very cautious about using high resilient reduced
modulus values, or their overlay thickness values will
be too thin
Distress
Type Required Repair
Alligator All areas of high-severity alligator
5.4 AC OVERLAY OF Cracking cracking must be repaired Local­
AC PAVEMENT ized areas of medium-severity
alligator cracking should be repaired
unless a paving fabric or other
This section covers the design of AC overlays of AC
means of reflective crack control is
pavements The following construction tasks are in­
used The repair must include
volved in the placement of an AC overlay on an exist­ removal of any soft subsurface
ing AC pavement: material
Linear High-severity linear cracks should be
(1) Repairing deteriorated areas and making Cracks patched Linear cracks that are open
subdrainage improvements (if needed) greater than 0 25 inch should be
(2) Correcting surface rutting by milling or filled with a sand-asphalt mixture or
placing a leveling course other suitable crack filler Some
(3) Constructing widening (if needed) method of reflective crack control is
(4) Applying a tack coat recommended for transverse cracks
(5) Placing the AC overlay (including a reflective that experience significant opening
crack control treatment if needed) and closing
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-95

Rutting Remove ruts by milling or placement to AC overlays of jointed PCC pavements when
of a leveling course If rutting is the sawcut matches the joint or straight crack
severe, an investigation into which within an inch
layer is causing the rutting should (4) Increased AC overlay thickness reduces bend­
be conducted to determine whether ing and vertical shear under loads and also
or not an overlay is feasible reduces temperature variation in the existing
Surface Depressions, humps, and corrugations pavement Thus, thicker AC overlays are more
Irregu- require investigation and treatment effective in delaying the occurrence and deteri­
larities of their cause In most cases, oration of reflection cracks than are thinner
removal and replacement will be overlays However, increasing the AC overlay
required thickness is a costly approach to reflection
crack control
Reflection cracking can have a considerable (often
5.4.3 Reflection Crack Control controlling) influence on the life of an AC overlay
Deteriorated reflection cracks detract from a pave­
The basic mechanism of reflection cracking is ment’s serviceability and also require frequent main­
strain concentration in the overlay due to movement in tenance, such as sealing and patching Reflection
the vicinity of cracks in the existing surface This cracks also permit water to enter the pavement struc­
movement may be bending or shear induced by loads, ture, which may result in loss of bond between the AC
or may be horizontal contraction induced by tempera­ overlay and existing AC surface, stripping in either
ture changes Load-induced movements are influ­ layer, and softening of the granular layers and sub­
enced by the thickness of the overlay and the thickness grade For this reason, reflection cracks should be
and stiffness of the existing pavement Temperature- sealed as soon as they appear and resealed periodi­
induced movements are influenced by daily and sea­ cally throughout the life of the overlay Sealing low-
sonal temperature variations, the coefficient of severity reflection cracks may also be effective in
thermal expansion of the existing pavement, and the retarding their progression to medium and high sever­
spacing of cracks ity levels
Pre-overlay repair (patching and crack filling) may
help delay the occurrence and deterioration of reflec­
tion cracks Additional reflection crack control mea­ 5.4.4 Subdrainage
sures which have been beneficial in some cases
include the following: See Section 5 2 4 for guidelines
(1) Synthetic fabrics and stress-absorbing interlay­
ers (SAMIs) have been effective in controlling
reflection of low- and medium-severity alliga­ 5.4.5 Thickness Design
tor cracking They may also be useful for con­
trolling reflection of temperature cracks, If the overlay is being placed for the purpose of
particularly when used in combination with structural improvement, the required thickness of the
crack filling They generally do little, however, overlay is a function of the structural capacity required
to retard reflection of cracks subject to signifi­ to meet future traffic demands and the structural ca­
cant horizontal or vertical movements pacity of the existing pavement The required thick­
(2) Crack relief layers greater than 3 inches thick ness to increase structural capacity to carry future
have been effective in controlling reflection of traffic is determined by the following equation
cracks subject to larger movements These
crack relief layers are composed of open-
SNo1 = ao[ * Dot = SNf — SNeff
graded coarse aggregate and a small percent­
age of asphalt cement
(3) Sawing and sealing joints in the AC overlay at where
locations coinciding with straight cracks in the
underlying AC may be effective in controlling SNol = Required overlay structural number
the deterioration of reflection cracks This aol = Structural coefficient for the AC overlay
technique has been very effective when applied D0l = Required overlay thickness, inches
111-96 Design o f Pavement Structures

SN f = Structural number required to carry deteriorated and will be repaired should not be tested
future traffic A heavy-load deflection device (e g , Falling Weight
S N eff = Effective structural number of the Deflectometer) and a load magnitude of approxi­
existing pavement mately 9,000 pounds are recommended ASTM D
4694 and D 4695 provide additional guidance on de­
The required overlay thickness may be determined flection testing Deflections should be measured at the
through the following design steps These steps pro­ center of the load and at least one other distance from
vide a comprehensive design approach that recom­ the load, as described below
mends testing the pavement to obtain valid design
inputs If it is not possible to conduct testing (e g , for (1) Subgrade resilient modulus (MR) At suffi­
a low-volume road), an approximate overlay design ciently large distances from the load, deflec­
may be developed based upon visible distress observa­ tions measured at the pavement surface are due
tion, by skipping Steps 4 and 5 and by estimating other to subgrade deformation only, and are also in­
inputs dependent of the size of the load plate This
permits the backcalculation of the subgrade re­
Step 1: Existing pavement design and silient modulus from a single deflection mea­
construction. surement and the load magnitude, using the
(1) Thickness and material type of each pavement following equation
layer
(2) Available subgrade soil information (from con­
struction records, soil surveys, county agricul­
tural soils reports, e tc )

Step 2: Traffic analysis.

where
(1) Past cumulative 18-kip ESALs in the design
lane (Np), for use in the remaining life method
of SNeff determination only M r = backcalculated subgrade resilient
(2) Predicted future 18-kip ESALs in the design modulus, psi
lane over the design period (Nf) P = applied load, pounds
dr = deflection at a distance r from the
Step 3: Condition survey. center of the load, inches
r = distance from center of load,
Distress types and severities are defined in refer­
inches
ence 11 The following distresses are measured during
the condition survey and are used in the determination
of the structural coefficients Sampling along the pro­ It should be noted that no temperature adjust­
ject in the heaviest trafficked lane can be used to esti­ ment is needed in determining MR since the
mate these quantities deflection used is due only to subgrade defor­
mation
(1) Percent of surface area with alligator cracking The deflection used to backcalculate the
(class 1 ,2 , and 3 corresponding to low, me­ subgrade modulus must be measured far
dium, and high severities) enough away that it provides a good estimate of
(2) Number of transverse cracks per mile (low, the subgrade modulus, independent of the ef­
medium, and high severities) fects of any layers above, but also close enough
(3) Mean rut depth that it is not too small to measure accurately
(4) Evidence of pumping at cracks and at pave­ The minimum distance may be determined
ment edges from the following relationship:

Step 4: Deflection testing

(strongly recommended).
r > 0 7ae
Measure deflections in the outer wheel path at an
interval sufficient to adequately assess conditions In­
tervals of 100 to 1,000 feet are typical Areas that are where
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-97

p = NDT load plate pressure, psi

Sl +
-V a = NDT load plate radius, inches
D = total thickness of pavement layers
above the subgrade, inches
ae = radius of the stress bulb at the M r = subgrade resilient modulus, psi
subgrade-pavement interface, inches E p = effective modulus of all pavement
a = NDT load plate radius, inches layers above the subgrade, psi
D = total thickness of pavement layers
above the subgrade, inches
For a load plate radius of 5 9 inches, Figure
E p = effective modulus of all pavement
5 5 may be used to determine the ratio Ep/M R,
layers above the subgrade, psi
and Ep may then be determined for a known or
(described below)
assumed value of MR
For purposes of comparison of Ep along the
Before the backcalculated MR value is used
length of a project, the do values used to deter­
in design, it must be adjusted to make it con­
sistent with the value used in the AASHTO mine Ep should be adjusted to a single refer­
flexible pavement design equation An adjust­ ence temperature Furthermore, if the effective
ment may also be needed to account for sea­ structural number of the existing pavement is
sonal effects These adjustments are described to be determined in Step 7 using the values of
in Step 6 Ep backcalculated from deflection data, the
(2) Temperature of AC mix The temperature of reference temperature for adjustment of d0
the AC mix during deflection testing must be should be 68°F, to be consistent with the pro­
determined The AC mix temperature may be cedure for new AC pavement design described
measured directly, or may be estimated from in Part II Figure 5 6 may be used to adjust d0
surface or air temperatures for AC pavements with granular and asphalt-
(3) Effective modulus of the pavement (Ep) If the stabilized bases Figure 5 7 may be used to
subgrade resilient modulus and total thickness adjust d0 for AC pavements with cement- and
of all layers above the subgrade are known or pozzolanic-stabilized bases
assumed, the effective modulus of the entire
pavement structure (all pavement layers above Step 5: Coring and materials testing
the subgrade) may be determined from the de­ (strongly recommended).
flection measured at the center of the load
plate using the following equation (1) Resilient modulus o f subgrade If deflection
testing is not performed, laboratory testing of
samples of the subgrade may be conducted
to determine its resilient modulus using
do = 1 5pa AASHTO T 292-91 I with a deviator stress of
6 psi to match the deviator stress used in estab­
lishing the 3,000 psi for the AASHO Road Test
soil that is incorporated into the flexible design
i equation Alternatively, other tests such as R
1
value, CBR or soil classification tests could be
conducted and approximate correlations used
_ a! - ♦ m to estimate resilient modulus Use of the esti­
+
mating equation MR = 1500 * CBR may pro­
duce a value that is too large for use in this
where design procedure The relationships found in
Appendix FF, Figure FF-6 may be more rea­
d0 = deflection measured at the center sonable
of the load plate (and adjusted to a (2) Samples o f AC layers and stabilized base
standard temperature of 68°F), should be visually examined to assess asphalt
inches stripping, degradation, and erosion
 111-98

o
o
o
Total pavement thickness D, inches
Figure 5.5. Determination of E P/M R
Design o f Pavement Structures
 Temperature Adjustment Factor
Rehabilitation with Overlays

O
O
_

^
o

o
o
o

o
o
o

o>
O

'«*

CO
CO

CO

in
CM

o
<
0

0
3
0

l.
©

0
*D
k_

E
*->

.0
O)

o.
CO
<D

Figure 5.6. Adjustment to do for AC Mix Temperature for Pavement with Granular or Asphalt-Treated Base
111-99
 Temperature Adjustment Factor
III-100

CM
o
00
o
CO
o
o
O
O

^O

o
o

o
o

o
oo

N.
O)

CO

in
CM

CO
<
a

O
3

£
E
i_
•o
w

u.
0)
0)
k_
Q)

CO
<D
O)

CD

Figure 5.7. Adjustment to d0 for AC mix Temperature for Pavement with Cement- or Pozzolanic-Treated Base
Design o f Pavement Structures
Rehabilitation with Overlays III-101

(3) Samples o f granular base and subbase should Note also that the presence of a very stiff
be visually examined and a gradation run to layer (e g , bedrock) within about 15 feet of
assess degradation and contamination by fines the top of the subgrade may cause the back-
(4) The thickness o f all layers should be mea­ calculated M r to be high When such a condi­
sured tion exists, a value less than 0 33 for C may be
warranted (9)
Step 6: Determination o f required structural The designer is cautioned against using a
num ber fo r fu tu re traffic (SN f). value of M r that is too large The value of MR
selected for design is extremely critical to the
(1) Effective design subgrade resilient modulus
overlay thickness The use of a value greater
Determine by one of the following methods
than 3,000 psi is an indication that the soil is
(a) Laboratory testing described in Step 5
stiffer than the silty-clay A-6 soil at the Road
(b) Backcalculation from deflection data
Test site, and consequently will provide in­
(N o te : this value must be adjusted to be
creased support and extended pavement life
consistent with the value used in the
(2) Design PSI loss PSI immediately after overlay
AASHTO flexible pavement design
(PI) minus PSI at time of next rehabilitation
equation as described below )
(c) A very approximate estimate can be (P2)
(3) Overlay design reliability R (percent) See Part
made using available soil information
I, Section 4 2, Part II, Table 2 2, and Part III,
and relationships developed from resil­
Section 5 2 15
ient modulus studies However, if as-
(4) Overall standard deviation S0fo r flexible pave­
constructed soil data are used, the
resilient modulus may have changed ment See Part I, Section 4 3
since construction due to changes in
Compute SNf for the above design inputs using the
moisture content or other factors
flexible pavement design equation or nomograph in
Regardless of the method used, the effective
Part II, Figure 3 1 When designing an overlay thick­
design subgrade resilient modulus must be (1)
ness for a uniform pavement section, mean input
representative of the effects of seasonal varia­
values must be used When designing an overlay
tion and (2) consistent with the resilient modu­
thickness for specific points along the project, the data
lus value used to represent the AASHO Road
for that point must be used A worksheet for determin­
Test soil A seasonal adjustment, when
ing SNf is provided in Table 5 1
needed, may be made in accordance with the
procedures described in Part II, Section 2 3 1
M r values backcalculated from deflections Step 7: Determination o f effective structural
must be adjusted to be consistent with the labo­ num ber (SNeff) o f the existing pavement
ratory-measured value used for the AASHO Three methods are presented for determining the
Road Test soil in the development of the flexi­ effective structural number of a conventional AC
ble pavement design equation It is recom­ pavement: an NDT method, a condition survey
mended that backcalculated MR values be method, and a remaining fatigue life method It is
multiplied by a correction factor C = 0 33 for suggested that the designer use all three of these to
use in determination of SNf for design pur­ evaluate the pavement, and then select a value for
poses when an FWD load of approximately SNeff based on the results, using engineering judgment
9,000 pounds is used (9) This value should be and the past experience of the agency
evaluated and adjusted if needed by user agen­
cies for their soil and deflection measurement
equipment Therefore, the following design
M r should be used to determine SNf SNeff from NDT for AC Pavements

^ (0 24P The NDT method of SNeff determination follows an

Design Mr = C I —— assumption that the structural capacity of the pave­
ment is a function of its total thickness and overall
stiffness The relationship between SNeff, thickness,
where recommended C = 0 33 and stiffness is:
111-102 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 5.1. Worksheet for Determination of SNt for AC Pavements

TRAFFIC:
Future 18-kip ESALs in design lane over
design period, Nf = ________________________

EFFECTIVE ROAD-BED SOIL RESILIENT MODULUS:

Design resilient modulus, MR = ________________________psi
(Adjusted for consistency with flexible pavement model and for seasonal variations
Topical design MR is 2,000 to 10,000 psi for fine-grained soils, 10,000 to 20,000
for coarse-grained soils The AASHO Road Test soil value used in the flexible
pavement design equation was 3,000 p s i )

SERVICEABILITY LOSS:
Design PSI loss (PI — P2) (1 2 to 2 5) = ________________________

DESIGN RELIABILITY:
Overlay design reliability, R (80 to 99 percent) = _________________________ percent
Overall standard deviation, SG(typically 0 49) = _________________________

FUTURE STRUCTURAL CAPACITY:

Required structural number for future traffic is determined from flexible pavement
design equation or nomograph in Part II, Figure 3 1
SNf = _______________________

SNeff = 0 0045D SNeff = aiDi + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3

where where

D = total thickness of all pavement layers above D,, D2, D3 = thicknesses of existing pavement
the subgrade, inches surface, base, and subbase layers
a1; a2, a3 = corresponding structural layer
Ep = effective modulus of pavement layers above
coefficients
the subgrade, psi
m2, m3 = drainage coefficients for granular
base and subbase
Ep may be backcalculated from deflection data as
described in Step 4 Figure 5 8 may be used to deter­
See Part II, Table 2 4, for guidance in determining
mine SNeff according to the above equation
the drainage coefficients In selecting values for m2
and m3, note that the poor drainage situation for the
base and subbase at the AASHO Road Test would be
given drainage coefficient values of 1 0
SNeff from Condition Survey for AC Pavements Depending on the types and amounts of deteriora­
tion present, the layer coefficient values assigned to
The condition survey method of SNeff determina­ materials in in-service pavement should in most cases
tion involves a component analysis using the struc­ be less than the values that would be assigned to the
tural number equation same materials for new construction An exception to
Rehabilitation with Overlays III-103

0
0

Q 0
.A
■M
CO
00
0
1
H
c
XL
O &
ICm
&

c C0
0
E 00
v3
0
> 2
S3
0 00
Q. E

.2
SNeff
111-104 Design o f Pavement Structures

this general rule might be for unbound granular mate­

rials that show no sign of degradation or contamina­
tion
For example, one State uses 0 44 for its new high-
where
quality AC surface, but for overlay design purposes
uses a reduced coefficient for the same material in an
RL = remaining life, percent
existing pavement A value of 0 34 is assigned if the
Np = total traffic to date, ESALs
AC layer is in good condition, 0 25 if its condition is
N, 5 = total traffic to pavement “ failure,” ESALs
fair, and 0 15 if its condition is poor The condition
ratings are made on the basis of the amount of crack­
Nf 5 may be estimated using the new pavement de­
ing present
sign equations or nomographs in Part II To be con­
Limited guidance is presently available for the se­
sistent with the AASHO Road Test and the
lection of layer coefficients for in-service pavement
development of these equations, a “ failure” PSI equal
materials Each agency must adopt its own set of val­
to 1 5 and a reliability of 50 percent is recommended
ues Some suggested layer coefficients for existing SNeff is determined from the following equation
materials are provided in Table 5 2
The following notes apply to Table 5 2:
SNeff - CF * SN0
(1) All of the distress is as observed at the pave­
ment surface where
(2) Patching all high-severity alligator cracking is
recommended The AC surface and stabilized CF = condition factor determined from Figure
base layer coefficients selected should reflect 52
the amount of high-severity cracking remain­ SN0 = structural number of the pavement if it
ing after patching were newly constructed
(3) In addition to evidence of pumping noted dur­
ing condition survey, samples of base material The designer should recognize that SNeff deter­
should be obtained and examined for evidence mined by this method does not reflect any benefit for
of erosion, degradation and contamination by pre-overlay repair The estimate of SNeff obtained
fines, as well as evaluated for drainability, and should thus be considered a lower limit value The
layer coefficients reduced accordingly SNeff of the pavement will be higher if pre-overlay
(4) The percentage of transverse cracking is deter­ repair of load-associated distress (alligator cracking)
mined as (linear feet of cracking/square feet of is done This method for determining SNeff is not ap­
pavement) * 100 plicable, without modification, to AC pavements
(5) Coring and testing are recommended for evalu­ which have already received one or more AC overlays
ation of all materials and are strongly recom­ A worksheet for determination of SNeff is provided
mended for evaluation of stabilized layers in Table 5 3
(6) There may be other types of distress that, in
the opinion of the engineer, would detract from Step 8: Determination o f overlay thickness
the performance of an overlay These should be The thickness of AC overlay is computed as fol­
considered through an appropriate decrease of lows:
the structural coefficient of the layer exhibiting
the distress (e g , surface raveling of the AC,
stripping of an AC layer, freeze-thaw damage SNol (SNf - SNeff)
to a cement-treated base)

where

SNeff from Remaining Life for AC Pavements SNol = Required overlay structural number
aol = Structural coefficient for the AC overlay
The remaining life of the pavement is given by the Dol = Required overlay thickness, inches
following equation: SNf = Structural number determined in Step 6
Rehabilitation with Overlays III-105

Table 5.2. Suggested Layer Coefficients for Existing AC Pavement Layer M aterials
MATERIAL SURFACE CONDITION COEFFICIENT
AC Surface Little or no alligator cracking and/or only low-severity 0 35 to 0 40
transverse cracking
< 10 percent low-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 25 to 0 35
< 5 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking
> 1 0 percent low-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 20 to 0 30
< 1 0 percent medium-severity alligator cracking and/or
> 5 -1 0 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking
> 10 percent medium-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 14 to 0 20
< 10 percent high-severity alligator cracking and/or
> 10 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking
> 10 percent high-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 08 to 0 15
> 10 percent high-severity transverse cracking

Stabilized Base Little or no alligator cracking and/or only low-severity 0 20 to 0 35

transverse cracking
< 10 percent low-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 15 to 0 25
< 5 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking
> 10 percent low-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 15 to 0 20
< 1 0 percent medium-severity alligator cracking and/or
> 5 -1 0 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking
> 10 percent medium-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 10 to 0 20
< 10 percent high-severity alligator cracking and/or
> 1 0 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking
> 10 percent high-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 08 to 0 15
> 10 percent high-severity transverse cracking

Granular Base No evidence of pumping, degradation, or contamination by fines 0 10 to 0 14

or Subbase
Some evidence of pumping, degradation, or contamination by fines 0 00 to 0 10

SNeff = Effective structural number of the analyses No adjustment need be made to SNeff values
existing pavement, from Step 7 determined by NDT if the depth of milling does not
exceed the minimum necessary, to remove surface
The thickness of overlay determined from the ruts If a greater depth is milled, the NDT-determined
above relationship should be reasonable when the S N ^ may be reduced by an amount equal to the depth
overlay is required to correct a structural deficiency milled times a structural coefficient for the AC surface
See Section 5 2 17 for discussion of factors which based on the condition survey
may result in unreasonable overlay thicknesses

5.4.6 Surface Milling

5.4.7 Shoulders
If the AC pavement is to be milled prior to overlay,
the depth of milling must be reflected in the SNeff See Section 5 2 10 for guidelines
111-106 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 5.3. W orksheet for D eterm ination of SNe{f for AC Pavement

(1) NDT Method For SNetf For AC Pavement:

Total thickness of all pavement layers above subgrade, D inches
Backcalculated subgrade resilient modulus, MR psi
Backcalculated effective pavement modulus, Ep psi

SNeff = 0 0045D y/Rp = ____

(2) Condition Survey Method For SNeff For AC Pavement:

Thickness of AC surface, D, = inches
Structural coefficient of AC surface, a,, based on condition
survey and coring data = ________________________
Thickness of base, D2 = _________________________ inches
Structural coefficient of base, a2, based on condition survey,
material inspection, and testing = _________________________
Drainage coefficient of base, m2 = -------------------------------------
Thickness of subbase, D3, if present = inches
Structural coefficient of subbase, a3, based on condition survey,
material inspection, and testing = ________________________
Drainage coefficient of subbase, m3 = ------------------------------------

SNeff — aiDi + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3 = _______________________

5.4.8 Widening Crack/seat consists of cracking a JPCP into

pieces typically one to three feet in size and
See Section 5 2 16 for guidelines seating the pieces firmly into the founda­
tion
Seating typically consists of several passes of a
35- to 50-ton rubber-tired roller over a
cracked or broken slab
5.5 AC OVERLAY OF
FRACTURED PCC Rubblize/compact consists of completely frac­
turing any type of PCC slab (JRCP, JPCP,
SLAB PAVEMENT
or CRCP) into pieces smaller than one foot
and then compacting the layer, typically
This section covers the design of AC overlays
with two or more passes of a 10-ton vibra­
placed on PCC pavements after they have been frac­
tory roller
tured by any of the following techniques break/seat,
crack/seat or rubblize/compact The following construction tasks are involved in the
placement of an AC overlay on a fractured PCC slab
Break/seat consists of breaking a JRCP into
pavement:
pieces larger than about one foot, rupturing
the reinforcement or breaking its bond with (1) Removing and replacing areas that will result
the concrete, and seating the pieces firmly in uneven support after fracturing
into the foundation (2) Making subdrainage improvements if needed
Rehabilitation with Overlays III-107

Table 5.3. W orksheet for D eterm ination of SNeff for AC Pavement (continued)

(3) Remaining Life Method For SNeff for AC Pavement:

Past 18-kip ESALs in design lane since construction, Np
18-kip ESALs to failure of existing design, Ni 5

RL = 100
N, 5

Condition factor, CF (Figure 5 2)

Thickness of AC surface, D! inches
Structural coefficient of AC surface, ai, if newly constructed
Thickness of base, D2 inches
Structural coefficient of base, a2, if newly constructed
Thickness of subbase, D3, if present inches
Structural coefficient of subbase, a3, if newly constructed

SN„ = a ^ ! + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3 =

SNeff = CF * SN0 =

(3) Breaking and seating, crack and seating or rub- jects, from less than 100,000 psi to several hundred
blizing the PCC slab and rolling to seat or thousand psi (16, 17, 18), and within-project coeffi­
compact cients of variation of as much as 40 percent (16, 18)
(4) Constructing widening if needed Crack and seat is used only with JPCP and involves
(5) Applying a tack or prime coat cracking the slab into pieces typically one to three feet
(6) Placing the AC overlay (including a reflection in size Recent field testing of several cracked and
crack control treatment if needed) seated JPCP projects showed a wide range in back-
calculated modulus values among different projects,
5.5.1 Feasibility from a few hundred thousand psi to a few million psi
(16, 19, 20, 21, 22), and within-project coefficients
Break/seat, crack/seat and rubblizing techniques of variation of 40 percent or more (16) Reference 16
are used to reduce the size of PCC pieces to minimize recommends that to avoid reflection cracking no more
the differential movements at existing cracks and than 5 percent of the fractured slab have a modulus
joints, thereby minimizing the occurrence and severity greater than 1 million psi Effective slab cracking
of reflection cracks The feasibility of each technique techniques are necessary in order to satisfy this crite­
is described below rion for crack/seat of JPCP
Rubblizing can be used on all types of PCC pave­ Break/seat is used only with JRCP and includes the
ments in any condition It is particularly recom­ requirement to rupture the reinforcement steel across
mended for reinforced pavements Fracturing the slab each crack, or break its bond with the concrete If the
into pieces less than 12 inches reduces the slab to a reinforcement is not ruptured and its bond with the
high-strength granular base Recent field testing of concrete is not broken, the differential movements at
several rubblized projects showed a wide range in working joints and cracks will not be reduced and
backcalculated modulus values among different pro­ reflection cracks will occur Recent field testing of
111-108 Design o f Pavement Structures

several break/seat projects showed a wide range in compact the rubble At least one agency that has used
backcalculated modulus values ranging from a few crack/seat of JPCP successfully for several years
hundred thousand psi to several million psi (16, 18, specifies that a fabric be placed in the overlay to aid in
1 9 ,2 2 ), and within-project coefficients of variation of controlling reflection cracking For break/seat of
40 percent or more (16, 18) The wide range in back- JRCP, reflective cracks will develop if the steel rein­
calculated moduli reported for break and seat projects forcement is not ruptured and its bond to the concrete
suggests a lack of consistency in the technique as per­ is not broken, and if this cannot be guaranteed, it is
formed with past construction equipment Even recommended that JRCP be rubblized
though cracks are observed, the JRCP frequently re­
tains a substantial degree of slab action because of
failure to either rupture the reinforcing steel or break
5.5.4 Subdrainage
its bond with the concrete This may also be responsi­
ble for the inconsistency of this technique in reducing
See Section 5 2 4 for guidelines Rubblizing PCC
reflection cracking More effective breaking equip­
pavement produces fines which may clog the filter
ment may overcome this problem This design proce­
materials placed in edge drains This should be con­
dure assumes that the steel will be ruptured or that its
sidered in the design of the filter materials If longitu­
bond to the concrete will be broken through an aggres­
dinal subdrains are to be installed, this should be done
sive break/seat process, and that this will be verified
prior to fracturing the slab
in the field through deflection testing before the over­
lay is placed The use of rubblization is recommended
for JRCP due to its ability to break slab continuity
These slab fracturing techniques are generally 5.5.5 Thickness Design
more cost-effective on more deteriorated concrete
pavements than on less deteriorated concrete pave­ The required thickness of the overlay is a function
ments This is due to the trade-off between the reduc­ of the structural capacity required to meet future traf­
tion in the amount of pre-overlay repair required for fic demands and the structural capacity of the existing
working cracks and deteriorated joints, and the cost of slab after fracturing The required thickness is deter­
slab fracturing and increased overlay thickness re­ mined by the following equation
quired (1, 22)
S N 0i = a0j * Dol = S N f — S N eff

5.5.2 Pre-overlay Repair

where
The amount of preoverlay repair needed for break/
seat, crack/seat and rubblized projects is not clear SN0l =
Required overlay structural number
Most projects done prior to 1991 have not included a a0) =
Structural coefficient for the AC overlay
significant amount of repair However, the recom­ D0, =
Required overlay thickness, inches
mended approach is to repair any condition that may SNf =
Structural number required to carry
provide nonuniform support after the fracturing pro­ future traffic
cess so that it will not rapidly reflect through the AC SNeff — Effective structural number of the
overlay Also, some AC leveling may be needed for existing pavement after fracturing
settled areas before the overlay is placed
The required overlay thickness is determined
through the following design steps
5.5.3 Reflection Crack Control
Step 1: Existing pavement design and
Slab fracturing techniques were developed as meth­
construction.
ods of reflection crack control When properly con­
structed, the crack/seat and rubblizing methods are (1) Thickness and material type of each pavement
reasonably effective and should require no additional layer
crack control treatment However, care must be exer­ (2) Available subgrade soil information (from con­
cised to assure uniform cracking or rubblizing across struction records, soil surveys, county agricul­
the slab width and to firmly seat the cracked slab or tural soils reports, e tc )
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-109

Step 2: Traffic analysis. The deflection used to backcalculate the

(1) Predicted future 18-kip ESALs in the design subgrade modulus must be measured far
enough away that it provides a good estimate of
lane over the design period (Nf)
the subgrade modulus, independent of the ef­
Use flexible pavement equivalency factors
If available future traffic estimates are in terms fects of any layers above, but also close enough
that it is not too small to measure accurately
of rigid pavement ESALs, they must be con­
The minimum distance may be determined
verted to flexible pavement ESALs by dividing
by 1 5 (e g , 15 million rigid pavement ESALs from the following relationship:
approximately equal 10 million flexible pave­
r > 0 7ae
ment ESALs)
where
Step 3: Condition survey.
Condition survey data are not used in the determi­
nation of overlay thickness However, condition sur­
vey data should be used to determine whether or not
fracturing is cost-effective compared to other types of
rehabilitation ae = radius of the stress bulb at the
subgrade-pavement interface, inches
Step 4: Deflection testing (recommended). a = NDT load plate radius, inches
Deflection measurements are used only for the de­ D = total thickness of pavement layers
termination of the design subgrade resilient modulus above the subgrade, inches
Deflections should be measured on the bare PCC slab Ep = effective modulus of all pavement
surface (prior to fracturing) at midslab locations that layers above the subgrade, psi
are not cracked A heavy-load deflection device (e g , (described below)
Falling Weight Deflectometer) and a load magnitude
Before the backcalculated MR value is used
of approximately 9,000 pounds are recommended
in design, it must be adjusted to make it con­
ASTM D 4694 and D 4695 provide additional guid­
sistent with the value used in the AASHTO
ance on deflection testing A deflection measurement
flexible pavement design equation An adjust­
at a distance of approximately 4 feet from the center of
ment may also be needed to account for sea­
load is needed
sonal effects These adjustments are described
(1) Subgrade resilient modulus (MR) At suffi­ in Step 6
ciently large distances from the load, deflec­ (2) Effective modulus of the pavement (Ep) If the
tions measured at the pavement surface are due subgrade resilient modulus and total thickness
to subgrade deformation only, and are also in­ of all layers above the subgrade are known or
dependent of the size of the load plate This assumed, the effective modulus of the entire
permits the backcalculation of the subgrade re­ pavement structure (all pavement layers above
silient modulus from a single deflection mea­ the subgrade) may be determined from the de­
surement and load magnitude, using the flection measured at the center of the load
following equation plate using the following equation

0 24P r
Mr =
drr
do = 1 5pa D E
M R ^ 1 + - 3
where 3 \ Mr

M r = backcalculated subgrade resilient i

1
modulus, psi
s’T o '

P = applied load, pounds

i— t

dr = deflection at a distance r from the a!

1

center of the load, inches

r = distance from center of load, inches
111-110 Design o f Pavement Structures

where (a) Laboratory testing as described in Step

5
do = deflection measured at the center (b) Backcalculation from deflection data
of the load plate, inches (N o te : this value must be adjusted to be
p = NDT load plate pressure, psi consistent with the value used in the
a = NDT load plate radius, inches AASHTO flexible pavement design
D = total thickness of pavement equation as described below )
layers above the subgrade, (c) A very approximate estimate can be
inches made using available soil information
M r = subgrade resilient modulus, psi and relationships developed from resil­
Ep = effective modulus of all ient modulus studies However, if as-
pavement layers above the built records are used, it should be noted
subgrade, psi that the resilient modulus may have
changed since construction due to changes
For a load plate radius of 5 9 inches, Figure in moisture content or other factors
5 5 may be used to determine the ratio Ep/M R, Regardless of the method used, the effective
and Ep may then be determined for a known or design subgrade resilient modulus must be (1)
assumed value of MR representative of the effects of seasonal varia­
tion and (2) consistent with the resilient modu­
Deflection measurements are also useful after the lus value used to represent the AASHO Road
break/seat or crack/seat operations to insure that the Test soil A seasonal adjustment, when,
slab has been sufficiently fractured (16) needed, may be made in accordance with the
procedures described in Part II, Section 2 3 1
Mr values backcalculated from deflections
Step 5: Coring and material testing. must be adjusted to make the values consistent
(1) Resilient modulus o f subgrade If deflection with the laboratory-measured value used for
testing is not performed, laboratory testing of the AASHO Road Test soil in the development
samples of the subgrade may be conducted of the flexible pavement design equation For
to determine its resilient modulus using conventional AC pavements, it was recom­
AASHTO T 292-91 I with a deviator stress of mended that backcalculated MR values be mul­
6 psi to match the deviator stress used in estab­ tiplied by a correction factor C = 0 33 for use
lishing the 3,000 psi for the AASHO Road Test in determination of SNf for design purposes
soil that is incorporated into the flexible design when a FWD load of approximately 9,000
equation Alternatively, other tests such as R pounds is used (9) However, because sub­
value, CBR or soil classification tests could be grade stresses are much lower under a PCC
conducted and approximate correlations used slab than under a flexible pavement, it is rec­
to estimate resilient modulus Use of the esti­ ommended that a smaller correction factor,
mating equation MR = 1500 * CBR may pro­ C = 0 25, be used to provide a better estimate
duce a value that is too large for use in this of the subgrade MR This value should be eval­
design procedure The relationships found in uated and adjusted if needed by user agencies
Appendix FF, Figure FF-6 may be more rea­ for their soil and deflection measurement
sonable equipment The following design MR is recom­
(2) Samples o f base layers should be examined to mended for use in determining the SNf for
assess degradation and contamination by fines fractured slabs when deflection testing is done
on top of the PCC slab

Step 6: Determination o f required

structural number fo r ~ • w
Design I —24P\
MR = ^C (° — )
fu tu re traffic (SNf).

(1) Effective design subgrade resilient modulus

Determine by one of the following methods: where recommended C = 0 25
Rehabilitation with Overlays I ll- I ll

N ote also that the presence of a very stiff value of 1 0 for m2 is recommended In selecting val­
layer (e g , bedrock) within about 15 feet of ues for m3, note that the poor drainage situation for
the top of the subgrade may cause the back- the base and subbase at the AASHO Road Test would
calculated Mr to be high When such a condi­ be given drainage coefficient values of 1 0
tion exists, a value less than 0 25 for C may be Suggested layer coefficients for fractured slab pave­
warranted (8, 9) ments ard provided in Table 5 5 Each agency should
The designer is cautioned against using a adopt its own set of layer coefficient values for frac­
value of M r that is too large The value of MR tured slabs keyed to its construction results on its
selected for design is extremely critical to the pavements
overlay thickness The use of a value greater Since the layer coefficient represents the overall
than 3,000 psi is an indication that the soil is performance contribution of that layer, it is likely that
stiffer than the silty-clay A-6 soil at the Road it is not related solely to the modulus of that layer, but
Test site, and consequently will provide in­ to other properties as well, such as the load transfer
creased support and extended pavement life capability of the pieces The large variability of layer
(2) Design PSI loss PSI immediately after overlay moduli within a project is also of concern This extra
(PI) minus PSI at time of next rehabilitation variability should ideally be expressed in an increased
(P2) overall standard deviation in designing for a given
(3) Overlay design reliability R (percent) See Part reliability level
I, Section 4 2, Part II, Table 2 2, and Part III, A worksheet for determination of SNeff is provided
Section 5 2 15 in Table 5 6
(4) Overall standard deviation SQfo r flexible pave­
ment See Part I, Section 4 3 Step 8: Determination o f overlay thickness.

Compute S N f for the above design inputs using the The thickness of AC overlay is computed as fol­
flexible pavement design equation or nomograph in lows
Part II, Figure 3 1 When designing an overlay thick­
ness for a uniform pavement section, mean input SNol (SNf - SNeff)
values must be used When designing an overlay u o\ ~ —
aol aol
thickness for specific points along the project, the data
for that point must be used A worksheet for determin­
ing S N f is provided in Table 5 4 where

S N ol = Required overlay structural number

Step 7: Determination o f effective structural
aol = Structural coefficient for the AC overlay
num ber (SNeff) o f the existing fractured
Dol = Required AC overlay thickness, inches
slab pavem ent.
SN f = Structural number determined in Step 6
SNeff is determined by component analysis using S N eff = Effective structural number of the
the structural number equation: existing pavement, from Step 7

The thickness of overlay determined from the

SNeff ~ a2D2m2 3- a3D3m3 above relationship should be reasonable when the
overlay is required to correct a structural deficiency
where See Section 5 2 17 for discussion of factors which
may result in unreasonable overlay thicknesses
D2, D3 = thicknesses of fractured slab and base
layers
a2, a3 = corresponding structural layer 5.5.6 Shoulders
coefficients
m2, m3 = drainage coefficients for fractured See Section 5 2 10 for guidelines
PCC and granular subbase

See Part II, Table 2 4, for guidance in determining 5.5.7 W idening

the drainage coefficients Due to lack of information
on drainage characteristics of fractured PCC, a default See Section 5 2 16 for guidelines
Ill-112 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 5.4. W orksheet for D eterm ination of SNf for F ractured Slab Pavements

T R A FFIC :
Future 18-kip ESALs in design lane over
design period, Nf = ________________________

E FFE C T IV E ROADBED SO IL R ESILIEN T MODULUS:

Design resilient modulus, MR = ________________ _____ psi
(Adjusted for consistency with flexible pavement model and for seasonal variations
Typical design MR is 2,000 to 10,000 psi for fine-grained soils, 10,000 to 20,000
for coarse-grained soils The AASHO Road Test soil value used in the flexible
pavement design equation was 3,000 p s i )

SERV ICEABILITY LOSS:

Design PSI loss (PI - P2) (1 2 to 2 5) = ________________________

DESIGN RELIABILITY:
Overlay design reliability, R (80 to 99 percent) = _________________________ percent
Overall standard deviation, Sc (typically 0 49) = _______________________ _

FU TU R E STRUCTURAL CAPACITY:
Required structural number for future traffic is determined from flexible pavement
design equation or nomograph in Part II, Figure 3 1
SNf = _______________________

Table 5.5. Suggested Layer Coefficients for F ractured Slab Pavements

M ATERIAL SLAB CONDITION C O EFFIC IEN T
Break/Seat JRCP Pieces greater than one foot with ruptured reinforcement 0 20 to 0 35
or steel/concrete bond broken
Crack/Seat JPCP Pieces one to three feet 0 20 to 0 35
Rubblized PCC Completely fractured slab with pieces less than one foot 0 14 to 0 30
(any pavement type)
Base/subbase granular No evidence of degradation or intrusion of fines 0 10 to 0 14
and stabilized Some evidence of degradation or intrusion of fines 0 00 to 0 10
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-113

Table 5.6. W orksheet for D eterm ination of SNeff for B reak/Seat,

C rack/S eat and Rubblized Pavements

Thickness of break/crack or rubblized PCC, D2 = ________________________ inches

Structural coefficient of break/crack/seat
or rubblized PCC, a2 = _______________________
Drainage coefficient of fractured slab, m2
( 1 0 recommended) = ________________________
Thickness of subbase, D3, if present = _________________________inches
Structural coefficient of subbase, a3 = ________________________
Drainage coefficient of subbase, m3 = ________________________

S N ^ = a2D2m2 + a3D3m3 = ------------------------------------

5.6 AC OVERLAY O F JPCP, dressed by reducing the overlay thickness un­

JRCP, AND C RC P der the bridges (although this may result in
early failure at these locations), by raising the
This section covers the design of AC overlays of bridges, or by reconstructing the pavement un­
existing JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP This section may also der the bridges Thicker AC overlays may also
be used to design an AC overlay if a previous AC necessitate raising signs and guardrails, as
overlay is completely removed well as increasing side slopes and extending
Construction of an AC overlay over JPCP, JRCP, or culverts Sufficient right-of-way must be avail­
CRCP consists of the following major activities able or obtainable to permit these activities
(1) Repairing deteriorated areas and making sub­
drainage improvements (if needed)
5.6.2 Preoverlay R epair
(2) Constructing widening (if needed)
(3) Applying a tack coat
The following types of distress in JPCP, JRCP, and
(4) Placing the AC overlay, including a reflection
CRCP should be repaired prior to placement of an AC
crack control treatment (if needed)
overlay

5.6.1 Feasibility Distress Type R epair Type

Working cracks Full-depth repair or slab
An AC overlay is a feasible rehabilitation alterna­
replacement
tive for PCC pavements except when the condition of
Punchouts Full-depth PCC repair
the existing pavement dictates substantial removal and
Spalled joints Full-depth or partial-depth
replacement Conditions under which an AC overlay
repair
would not be feasible include:
Deteriorated repairs Full-depth repair
(1) The amount of deteriorated slab cracking and Pumping/faulting Edge drains
joint spalling is so great that complete removal Settlements/heaves AC level-up, slab jacking, or
and replacement of the existing surface is dic­ localized reconstruction
tated
(2) Significant deterioration of the PCC slab has
occurred due to severe durability problems Full-depth repairs and slab replacements in JPCP
( e g , “ D ” cracking or reactive aggregates) and JRCP should be PCC, dowelled or tied to provide
(3) Vertical clearance at bridges is inadequate for load transfer across repair joints Some agencies have
required overlay thickness This may be ad­ placed full-depth AC repairs in JPCP and JRCP prior
111-114 Design o f Pavement Structures

to an AC overlay However, this has often resulted in courage reflection crack occurrence and subsequent
rough spots in the overlay, opening of nearby joints deterioration include subdrainage improvement, sub­
and cracks, and rapid deterioration of reflection sealing slabs which have lost support, and restoring
cracks at AC patch boundaries (See Part III, Section load transfer at joints and cracks with dowels grouted
4 3 1 and References 1 and 3 ) in slots
Full-depth repairs in CRCP should be PCC and A variety of reflection crack control measures have
should be continuously reinforced with steel which is been used in attempts to control the rates of reflection
tied or welded to reinforcing steel in the existing slab crack occurrence and deterioration Any one of the
to provide load transfer across joints and slab continu­ following treatments may be employed in an effort to
ity Full-depth AC repairs should not be used in CRCP control reflection cracking in an AC overlay of JPCP
prior to placement of an AC overlay, and any existing or JRCP:
AC patches in CRCP should be removed and replaced
with continuously reinforced PCC Guidelines on re­ (1) Sawing and sealing joints in the AC overlay at
pairs are provided in References 1 and 3 locations coinciding with joints in the under­
Installation of edge drains, maintenance of existing lying JPCP or JRCP This technique has been
edge drains, or other subdrainage improvement should very successful when applied to AC overlays of
be done prior to placement of the overlay if a sub­ jointed PCC pavements when the sawcut
drainage evaluation indicates a need for such an im­ matches the joint or straight crack within an
provement inch
Pressure relief joints should be placed only at fixed (2) Increasing AC overlay thickness Reflection
structures, and not at regular intervals along the pave­ cracks will take more time to propagate
ment The only exception to this is where reactive through a thicker overlay and deteriorate more
aggregate has caused expansion of the slab On heav­ slowly
ily trafficked routes, pressure relief joints should be of (3) Placing a bituminous-stabilized granular in­
heavy-duty design with dowels (3) If joints contain terlayer (large-sized large stone), prior to or
significant incompressibles, they should be cleaned in combination with placement o f the AC over­
and resealed prior to placement of the overlay lay has been effective
(4) Placing a synthetic fabric or a stress-absorb­
ing interlayer prior to or within the AC
5.6.3 Reflection Crack Control overlay. The effectiveness of this technique is
questionable
The basic mechanism of reflection cracking is (5) Rubblizing and compacting JPCP, JRCP, or
strain concentration in the overlay due to movement in CRCP prior to placement of the AC overlay
the vicinity of joints and cracks in the existing pave­ This technique reduces the size of PCC pieces
ment This movement may be bending or shear in­ to a maximum of about 12 inches and essen­
duced by loads, or may be horizontal contraction tially reduces the slab to a high-strength granu­
induced by temperature changes Load-induced move­ lar base course See Section 5 5 for the design
ments are influenced by the thickness of the overlay procedure for AC overlays of rubblized PCC
and the thickness and stiffness of the existing pave­ pavement
ment Temperature-induced movements are influ­ (6) Cracking and seating JPCP or breaking and
enced by daily and seasonal temperature variations, seating JRCP prior to placement of the AC
the coefficient of thermal expansion of the existing overlay This technique reduces the size of
pavement, and the spacing of joints and cracks PCC pieces and seats them in the underlying
In an AC overlay of JPCP or JRCP, reflection base, which reduces horizontal (and possibly
cracks typically develop relatively soon after the over­ vertical) movements at cracks See Section 5 5
lay is placed (often in less than a year) The rate at for the design procedure for AC overlays of
which they deteriorate depends on the factors listed crack/seat JPCP and break/seat JRCP
above as well as the traffic level Thorough repair of
deteriorated joints and working cracks with full-depth Reflection cracking can have a considerable (often
dowelled or tied PCC repairs reduces the rate of re­ controlling) influence on the life of an AC overlay of
flection crack occurrence and deterioration, so long as JPCP or JRCP Deteriorated reflection cracks detract
good load transfer is obtained at the full-depth repair from a pavement’s serviceability and also require
joints Other preoverlay repair efforts which will dis­ frequent maintenance, such as sealing, milling, and
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-115

patching Reflection cracks also permit water to enter Deff = Effective thickness of existing slab,
the pavement structure, which may result in loss of inches
bond between the AC and PCC, stripping in the AC,
progression of “ D ” cracking or reactive aggregate The A factor, which is a function of the PCC thick­
distress in PCC slabs with these durability problems, ness deficiency, is given by the following equation,
and softening of the base and subgrade For this rea­ and is illustrated in Figure 5 9
son, reflection cracks should be sealed as soon as they
appear and resealed periodically throughout the life of A = 2 2233 + 0 Q099(Df - Deff)2
the overlay Sealing low-severity reflection cracks may
also be effective in retarding their progression to me­ - 0 1534(Df - Deff)
dium and high severity levels
With an AC overlay of CRCP, permanent repair of AC overlays of conventional JPCP, JRCP, and
punchouts and working cracks with tied or welded CRCP have been constructed as thin as 2 inches and as
reinforced PCC full-depth repairs will delay the oc­ thick as 10 inches The most typical thicknesses that
currence and deterioration of reflection cracks Im­ have been constructed for highways are 3 to 6 inches
proving subdrainage conditions and subsealing in The required overlay thickness may be determined
areas where the slab has lost support will also discour­ through the following design steps These design steps
age reflection crack occurrence and deterioration Re­ provide a comprehensive design approach that recom­
flection crack control treatments are not necessary for mends testing the pavement to obtain valid design in­
AC overlays of CRCP, except for longitudinal joints, puts If it is not possible to conduct this testing (e g ,
as long as continuously reinforced PCC repairs are for a low-volume road), an approximate overlay de­
used to repair deteriorated areas and cracks sign may be developed based upon visible distress
observations by skipping Steps 4 and 5, and by esti­
mating other inputs
5.6.4 Subdrainage The overlay design can be done for a uniform sec­
tion or on a point-by-point basis as described in Sec­
See Section 5 2 4 for guidelines tion 5 3 1

Step 1: Existing pavement design.

5.6.5 Thickness Design
(1) Existing slab thickness
If the overlay is being placed for some functional (2) Type of load transfer (mechanical devices, ag­
purpose such as roughness or friction, a minimum gregate interlock, CRCP)
thickness overlay that solves the functional problem (3) Type of shoulder (tied PCC, other)
should be placed If the overlay is being placed for the
purpose of structural improvement, the required thick­
Step 2: Traffic analysis.
ness of the overlay is a function of the structural ca­
pacity required to meet future traffic demands and the (1) Past cumulative 18-kip ESALs in the design
structural capacity of the existing pavement The re­ lane (Np), for use in the remaining life method
quired overlay thickness to increase structural capac­ of Deff determination only
ity to carry future traffic is determined by the (2) Predicted future 18-kip ESALs in the design
following equation lane over the design period (Nf)
Use ESALs computed from rigid pavement
load equivalency factors
D„i = A(Df — Detf)

Step 3: Condition survey.

where
The following distresses are measured during the
Dol = Required thickness of AC overlay, inches condition survey for JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP Sam­
A = Factor to convert PCC thickness pling along the most heavily trafficked lane of the
deficiency to AC overlay thickness project may be used to estimate these quantities Dis­
Df = Slab thickness to carry future traffic, tress types and severities are defined in Reference 23
inches Deteriorated means medium or higher severity
III-116 Design o f Pavement Structures
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-117

JPCP/JRCP: using Figures 5 10 and 5 11 or a backcalculation pro­

gram
(1) Number of deteriorated transverse joints per
The AREA of each deflection basin is computed by
mile
the following equation AREA will typically range
(2) Number of deteriorated transverse cracks per
from 29 to 32 for sound concrete
mile
(3) Number of full-depth AC patches, exception­
ally wide joints (greater than 1 inch), and ex­
pansion joints per mile (except at bridges)
(4) Presence and overall severity of PCC durabil­
ity problems where
(a) “ D ” cracking: low severity (cracks
only), medium severity (some spalling), d0 = deflection in center of loading plate, inches
high severity (severe spalling) dj = deflections at 12, 24, and 36 inches from
(b) Reactive aggregate cracking: low, me­ plate center, inches
dium, high severity
(5) Evidence of faulting, or pumping of fines or (1) Effective dynam ic k-value Enter Figure 5 10
water at joints, cracks, and pavement edge with d0 and AREA to determine the effective
dynamic k-value beneath each slab for a circu­
CRCP:
lar load radius of 5 9 inches and magnitude of
(1) Number of punchouts per mile 9,000 pounds For loads within 2,000 pounds
(2) Number of deteriorated transverse cracks per more or less, deflections may be scaled lin­
mile early to 9,000-pound deflections
(3) Number of full-depth AC patches, exception­ If a single overlay thickness is being de­
ally wide joints (greater than 1 inch) and ex­ signed for a uniform section, compute the
pansion joints per mile (except at bridges) mean effective dynamic k-value of the slabs
(4) Number of existing and new repairs prior to tested in the uniform section
overlay per mile (2) Effective sta tic k-value
(5) Presence and general severity of PCC durabil­
ity problems (N o te : surface spalling of tight
Effective static k-value
cracks where the underlying CRCP is sound
should not be considered a durability prob­ = Effective dynamic k-value/2
lem )
(a) “ D ” cracking low severity (cracks
The effective static k-value may need to be ad­
only), medium severity (some spalling), justed for seasonal effects using the approach
high severity (severe spalling) presented in Part II, Section 3 2 1 However,
(b) Reactive aggregate cracking low, me­ the k-value can change substantially and have
dium, high severity only a small effect on overlay thickness
(6) Evidence of pumping of fines or water (3) E lastic modulus o f P C C sla b (E) Enter Figure
5 11 with AREA, proceed to the effective dy­
Step 4: Deflection testing
namic k-value curves, and determine a value
(strongly recommended).
for ED3, where D is the slab thickness Solve
Measure slab deflection basins along the project at for E knowing the slab thickness, D Typical
an interval sufficient to adequately assess conditions slab E values range from 3 to 8 million psi If a
Intervals of 100 to 1,000 feet are typical Measure slab E value is obtained that is out of this
deflections with sensors located at 0, 12, 24, and 36 range, an error may exist in the assumed slab
inches from the center of load Measure deflections in thickness, the deflection basin may have been
the outer wheel path A heavy-load deflection device measured over a crack, or the PCC may be
(e g , Falling Weight Deflectometer) and a load mag­ significantly deteriorated
nitude of 9,000 pounds are recommended ASTM D If a single overlay thickness is being de­
4694 and D 4695 provide additional guidance on de­ signed for a uniform section, compute the
flection testing For each slab tested, backcalculate mean E value of the slabs tested in the uniform
the effective k-value and the slab’s elastic modulus section
111-118 Design o f Pavement Structures

CO
CO

in
CO

CO

Effective Dynamic k-Value Determination from d0 and AREA

CO
CO

CM CO
CO CD
JZ
o
c
CO
<
UJ
o cc
CO <
c
05 ’co
CO
CM .Q
c
tn CO
o
CM ts
I 0

r*. ‘a )
"D CM D

Figure 5.10.
C
o CO
o CM
Q
% in
•a CM
E
D
'M'
E CM

’S
2 CO
CM
CO CM O CD CO CM CD CO CM
CM CM CM CM
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-119

CO
CO

in
co

PCC Elastic Modulus Determination from k-Value, AREA, and Slab Thickness
co

co
co

CM
CO w
w a>
JC
o
f - C
CO

s
O CC
CO <
c
'tn
o> i0
CM .a
c
o
CO *=
CM O
<D
5=
PCC ED , Epsi, D inches

a>
h- Q
CM

CO
CM

in
CM
Figure 5.11.

CM

CO
CM
0) CO
o o
+ + + +
LU 111 LU LU
O o O O
HI-120 Design o f Pavement Structures

Do not use any k-values or E values that If the rehabilitation will include the addition of
appear to be significantly out of line with the a tied concrete shoulder, a lower J factor may
rest of the data be appropriate See Part II, Table 2 6
(4) Joint lo a d transfer. For JPCP and JRCP, mea­ For CRCP, use J = 2 2 to 2 6 for overlay
sure joint load transfer in the outer wheelpath design, assuming that working cracks are re­
at representative transverse joints Do not paired with continuously reinforced PCC
measure load transfer when the ambient tem­
perature is greater than 80 °F Place the load Step 5: Coring and materials testing (strongly
plate on one side of the joint with the edge of recommended).
the plate touching the joint Measure the de­ (1) P C C modulus o f rupture (S'c) Cut several 6-
flection at the center of the load plate and at 12 inch-diameter cores at midslab and test in indi­
inches from the center Compute the deflection rect tension (ASTM C 496) Compute the indi­
load transfer from the following equation rect tensile strength (psi) of the cores Estimate
the modulus of rupture with the following
equation
ALT = 100 * ( ^ j * B
S' = 2 1 0 + 1 02IT

where
where
ALT = deflection load transfer, percent
A ui = unloaded side deflection, inches S^ = modulus of rupture, psi
IT = indirect tensile strength of
A) = loaded side deflection, inches
B = slab bending correction factor 6-inch-diameter cores, psi

Step 6: Determination o f required slab thickness

The slab bending correction factor, B, is fo r fu tu re traffic (Df ).
necessary because the deflections d0 and d 12,
measured 12 inches apart, would not be equal The inputs to determine Df for AC overlays of PCC
even if measured in the interior of a slab An pavements are representative of the existing slab and
appropriate value for the correction factor may foundation properties This is emphasized because it
be determined from the ratio of d0 to d12 for is the properties of the existing slab (i e , elastic mod­
typical center slab deflection basin measure­ ulus, modulus of rupture, and load transfer) which
ments, as shown in the equation below Typical will control the performance of the AC overlay
values for B are between 1 05 and 115 (1) Effective sta tic k-value beneath existing P C C
sla b Determine from one of the following
T) 4o center
methods
= j (a) Backcalculate the effective dynamic k-
^12 center
value from deflection basins Divide the
effective dynamic k-value by 2 to obtain
If a single overlay thickness is being designed the effective static k-value The effective
for a uniform section, compute the mean de­ static k-value may need to be adjusted for
flection load transfer value of the joints tested seasonal effects using the approach pre­
in the uniform section sented in Part II, Section 3 2 1
For JPCP and JRCP, determine the J load (b) Conduct plate load tests (ASTM D 1196)
transfer coefficient using the following guide­ after slab removal at a few sites This
lines alternative is very costly and time-con­
suming and not often used The static k-
Percent Load Transfer J value obtained may need to be adjusted
for seasonal effects (see Part II, Section
>70 32 3 2 1)
50-70 35 (c) Estimate from soils data and base type
<50 40 and thickness, using Figure 3 3 in Part
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-121

II, Section 3 2 This alternative is sim­ (9) Subdrainage capability o f existing slab, after
ple, but the static k-value obtained must subdrainage improvements, if any See Part II,
be recognized as a rough estimate The Table 2 5, as well as reference 5, for guidance
static k-value may need to be adjusted for in determining Cd Pumping or faulting at
seasonal effects (see Part II, Section joints' and cracks determined in Step 3 is evi­
3 2 1) dence that a subdrainage problem exists In
(2) Design PSI loss PSI immediately after overlay selecting this value, note that the poor sub­
(PI) minus PSI at time of next rehabilitation drainage situation at the AASHO Road Test
(P 2 ) would be given a Cd of 1 0
(3) J, load transfer factor o f existing PCC slab
Compute Df for the above design inputs using the
See Step 4
rigid pavement design equation or nomograph in Part
(4) PCC modulus o f rupture o f existing slab deter­
II, Figure 3 7 When designing an overlay thickness
mined by one of the following methods:
for a uniform pavement section, mean input values
(a) Estimated from indirect tensile strength
must be used When designing an overlay thickness
measured from 6-inch-diameter cores as
for specific points along the project, the data for that
described in Step 5
point must be used A worksheet for determining Df is
(b) Estimated from the backcalculated E of
provided in Table 5 7 Typical values of inputs are
slab using the following equation
provided for guidance Values outside these ranges
should be used with caution

s c = 4 3 5 ( ^ g ) + 488 5 Step 7: Determination o f effective slab thickness

(Deff) o f existing pavement.
Condition survey and remaining life procedures are
where
presented
S' = modulus of rupture, psi
E = backcalculated elastic modulus Deff From Condition Survey For PCC Pavements
of PCC slab, psi
The effective thickness of the existing slab (Deff) is
For CRCP, S^ may be determined computed from the following equation
from the backcalculated E values only at
points which have no cracks within the
Deff = Fjc * Fdur * Ffat * D
deflection basins
(5) Elastic modulus o f existing PCC slab, deter­
where
mined by one of the following methods
(a) Backcalculated from deflection measure­ D = existing PCC slab thickness, inches
ments as described in Step 4
(b) Estimated from indirect tensile strength (1) Joints and cracks adjustment factor (Fjc) This
(6) Loss o f support o f existing slab Joint corners factor adjusts for the extra loss in PSI caused
that have loss of support may be identified by deteriorated reflection cracks in the overlay
using FWD deflection testing as described in that will result from any unrepaired deterio­
Reference 2 CRCP loss of support may be rated joints, cracks, and other discontinuities
determined by plotting a slab edge or in the existing slab prior to overlay A deterio­
wheelpath deflection profile and identifying rated joint or crack in the existing slab will
locations with significantly high deflections rapidly reflect through an AC overlay and con­
Existing loss of support can be corrected with tribute to loss of serviceability Therefore, it is
slab stabilization For overlay thickness design recommended that all deteriorated joints and
assume a fully supported slab, LS = 0 cracks (for non-“ D ” cracked or reactive ag­
(7) Overlay design reliability, R (percent) See gregate related distressed pavements) and any
Part I, Section 4 2, Part II, Table 2 2, and Part other major discontinuities in the existing slab
III, Section 5 2 15 be full-depth repaired with dowelled or tied
(8) Overall standard deviation (Sa) fo r rigid pave­ PCC repairs prior to overlay, so that Fjc =
ment See Part I, Section 4 3 1 00
122 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 5.7. Worksheet for Determination of Df for JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP

SLAB:
Existing PCC slab thickness = inches
Type of load transfer system mechanical device,aggregate interlock, CRCP
Type of shoulder = tied PCC, other
PCC modulus of rupture (typically 600 to 800 psi) = ________________________ psi
PCC E modulus (3 to 8 million psi for sound PCC,
< 3 million for unsound PCC) = _________________________psi
J load transfer factor (3 2 to 4 0 for JPCP,
JRCP 2 2 to 2 6 for CRCP) = _________________________

TRAFFIC:
Future 18-kip ESALs in design lane over
the design period (Nf) = _________________________

SUPPORT AND DRAINAGE:

Effective dynamic k-value = psi/inch
Effective static k-value = Effective dynamic k-value/2
(typically 50 to 500 psi/inch) = psi/inch
Subdrainage coefficient, Cd
(typically 1 0 for poor subdrainage conditions) = _______________________

SERVICEABILITY LOSS:
Design PSI loss (PI — P2) = _________________________

RELIABILITY:
Design reliability, R (80 to 99 percent) = _________________________percent
Overall standard deviation, SQ (typically 0 39) = _________________________

FUTURE STRUCTURAL CAPACITY:

Required slab thickness for future traffic is determined from rigid pavement
design equation or nomograph in Part II, Figure 3 7
Df = ________________________ inches

If it is not possible to repair all deteriorated Number of unrepaired deteriorated joints/

areas, the following information is needed to mile
determine Fjc, to increase the overlay thickness Number of unrepaired deteriorated cracks/
to account for the extra loss in PSI from deteri­ mile
orated reflection cracks in the design lane: Number of unrepaired punchouts/mile
Pavements with no “ D ” cracking or reac­ Number of expansion joints, exceptionally
tive aggregate distress: wide joints (greater than 1 inch), and
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-123

full-depth, full-lane-width AC patches/ 0 97-1 00 Few transverse

mile cracks/punchouts exist (none
Note that tight cracks held together by caused by “ D ” cracking or
reinforcement in JRCP or CRCP are not in­ reactive aggregate distress)
cluded However, if a crack in JRCP or JPCP < 5 percent slabs are cracked
CRCP is spalled and faulted the steel has JRCP < 25 working cracks per mile
probably ruptured, and the crack should be CRCP < 4 punchouts per mile
considered as working Surface spalling of
0 94-0 96 A significant number of
CRCP cracks is not an indication that the
transverse cracks/punchouts
crack is working
exist (none caused by “ D ”
The total number of unrepaired deterio­
cracking or reactive aggregate
rated joints, cracks, punchouts, and other
distress)
discontinuities per mile in the design lane is
JPCP: 5-15 percent slabs are cracked
used to determine the FjCfrom Figure 5 12
JRCP: 25-75 working cracks per mile
Pavements with “ D ” cracking or reactive CRCP 4-12 punchouts per mile
aggregate deterioration
0 90-0 93: A large number of transverse
These types of pavements often have de­
terioration at the joints and cracks from du­ cracks/punchouts exist (none
caused by “ D ” cracking or
rability problems The Fdur factor is used to
reactive aggregate distress)
adjust the overlay thickness for this prob­
JPCP > 1 5 percent slabs are cracked
lem Therefore, when this is the case, the
JRCP: > 75 working cracks per mile
Fjc should be determined from Figure 5 12
CRCP > 1 2 punchouts per mile
only using those unrepaired deteriorated
joints and cracks that are not caused by du­
rability problems If all of the deteriorated
joints and cracks are spalling due to “ D ” Deff From Rem aining Life For PCC Pavements
cracking or reactive aggregate, then Fjc =
1 0 This will avoid adjusting twice with Fjc The remaining life of the pavement is given by the
and p dur factors following equation:

(2) Durability adjustment factor (Fdur) This factor

adjusts for an extra loss in PSI of the overlay Nj,
RL = 100 1 -
when the existing slab has durability problems N ,s
such as “ D ” cracking or reactive aggregate
distress Using condition survey data from
Step 3, Fdur is determined as follows where

1 00 No sign of PCC durability RL = remaining life, percent

problems NP total traffic to date, ESALs
0 96-0 99: Durability cracking exists, but N ,s total traffic to pavement “ failure,” ESALs
no spalling
0 88-0 95: Substantial cracking and some Nj 5 may be estimated using the new pavement de­
spalling exists sign equations or nomographs in Part II To be con­
0 80-0 88: Extensive cracking and severe sistent with the AASHO Road Test and the
spalling exists development of these equations, a “ failure” PSI equal
(3) Fatigue damage adjustment factor (Ffat) This to 1 5 and a reliability of 50 percent are recom­
factor adjusts for past fatigue damage that may mended
exist in the slab It is determined by observing Deff is determined from the following equation
the extent of transverse cracking (JPCP, JRCP)
or punchouts (CRCP) that may be caused pri­ Deff = CF * D
marily by repeated loading Use condition sur­
vey data from Step 3 and the following
guidelines to estimate Ffat in the design lane where
111-124 Design o f Pavement Structures

O
O
CN

/ mile
O
00

Joints and Cracks

O
O

Fjc Adjustment Factor

05

O
O

Transverse
O

Figure 5.12.
CO

o
'O Deteriorated

o
05

o
m o in o «n o m o in o m o
1 .0 0

o o CO CO <5 <> m m ■sr

o o o d d o d o d d d d
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-125

CF = condition factor determined from Figure 5.6.7 Widening

5 2
D = thickness of the existing slab See Section 5 2 16 for guidelines

The designer should recognize that Deff determined

by this method does not reflect any benefit for pre­ 5.7 AC OVERLAY OF AC/JPCP, AC/JRCP,
overlay repair The estimate of Deff obtained should AND AC/CRCP
thus be considered a lower limit value The Deff of the
pavement will be higher if preoverlay repair of load- This section covers the design of AC overlays of
associated distress is done This method for determin­ existing AC/JPCP, AC/JRCP, or AC/CRCP Although
ing Deff is not applicable without modification to some pavements are newly constructed as AC/PCC,
pavements which have already received one or more the vast majority of existing AC/PCC pavements are
overlays, even if the overlay has been or will be com­ PCC pavements which have been overlaid with AC at
pletely milled off least once
A worksheet for determination of Deff for JPCP, Construction of an AC overlay of AC/JPCP, AC/
JRCP, and CRCP is provided in Table 5 8 JRCP, or AC/CRCP consists of the following major
activities
Step 8: Determination o f Overlay Thickness.
(1) Repairing deteriorated areas and making sub­
The thickness of AC overlay is computed as fol­ drainage improvements (if needed)
lows: (2) Milling a portion of the existing AC surface
(3) Constructing widening (if needed)
(4) Applying a tack coat
Dol = A(Df - Deff)
(5) Placing the AC overlay, including a reflection
crack control treatment (if needed)
where

Dol = Required thickness of AC overlay, inches 5.7.1 Feasibility

A = Factor to convert PCC thickness
deficiency to AC overlay thickness An AC overlay is a feasible rehabilitation alterna­
Df = Slab thickness determined in Step 6, tive for an AC/PCC pavement except when the condi­
inches tion of the existing pavement dictates substantial
Deff = Effective thickness of existing slab removal and replacement Conditions under which an­
determined in Step 7, inches other AC overlay would not be feasible include the
following
The A factor, which is a function of the PCC thick­
(1) The amount of deteriorated slab cracking and
ness deficiency, is given by the following equation and
joint spalling is so great that complete removal
is illustrated in Figure 5 9
and replacement of the existing surface is dic­
tated
A = 2 2233 + 0 0099(Df - Deff)2 (2) Significant deterioration of the PCC slab has
occurred due to severe durability problems
- 0 1534(Df - Deff)
(e g , “ D ” cracking or reactive aggregates)
(3) Vertical clearance at bridges is inadequate for
The thickness of overlay determined from the required overlay thickness This may be ad­
above relationship should be reasonable when the dressed by reducing the overlay thickness un­
overlay is required to correct a structural deficiency der the bridges (although this may result in
See Section 5 2 17 for discussion of factors which early failure at these locations), by raising the
may result in unreasonable overlay thicknesses bridges, or by reconstructing the pavement un­
der the bridges Thicker AC overlays may also
necessitate raising signs and guardrails, as
5.6.6 Shoulders well as increasing side slopes and extending
culverts Sufficient right-of-way must be avail­
See Section 5 2 10 for guidelines able or obtainable to permit these activities
III-126 Design of Pavement Structures

Table 5.8. C alculation of Deff for AC Overlay of JPCP, JRCP, and C RC P in the Design Lane

C ondition Survey M ethod:

Fjc Number of unrepaired deteriorated joints/mile = _________________________
Number of unrepaired deteriorated cracks/mile = _________________________
Number of unrepaired punchouts/mile = ________________________
Number of expansion joints, exceptionally wide joints
( > 1 inch) or AC full-depth patches/mile = _________
Total/mile = -------------
Fjc = (Figure 5 12)
(Recommended value 1 0, repair all deteriorated areas)

Fdur 1 00 No sign of PCC durability problems

0 96-0 99 Some durability cracking exists, but no spalling exists
0 88-0 95: Substantial cracking and some spalling exists
0 80-0 88 Extensive cracking and severe spalling exists

Fdur — ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ffat 0 97-1 00: Very few transverse cracks/punchouts exist

0 94-0 96 A significant number of transverse cracks/punchouts exist
0 90-0 93 A large number of transverse cracks/punchouts exist

Ffat — ----------------------------------------------

Deff — Fjc * Fdur * Ffat * D

Rem aining Life M ethod:

Np = Past design lane ESALs
Nj 5 = Design lane ESALs to P2 of 1 5

RL = 100
N i5

CF = (Figure 5 2)

Deff — CF * D —
Rehabilitation with Overlays III-127

When another AC overlay of an existing AC/JPCP, reflection cracks should be conducted to assess the
AC/JRCP, or AC/CRCP is being considered, the condition of the underlying pavement
causes of the deterioration in the existing pavement Coring should be conducted at areas of localized
should be carefully investigated If the PCC slab is distress to determine whether they are caused by a
sound and in good condition but the existing AC layer problem in the AC mix or deterioration in the PCC
is badly rutted or otherwise deteriorated, the AC (e g , “ D ” cracking) In the latter case, the PCC may
should be thoroughly repaired or milled off If, how­ be deteriorated to a much greater extent than is evident
ever, distress visible at the AC surface is predomi­ at the AC surface Additional coring or removal of
nantly a reflection of deterioration in the underlying portions of the AC may be necessary to select appro­
PCC, the pavement must be repaired through the full priate repair boundaries
depth of the AC and PCC Otherwise, the distress will Full-depth repairs to AC/PCC pavements should
reflect rapidly through the new AC overlay It is match the existing cross-section, i e , the PCC slab
strongly recommended that coring and deflection test­ should be full-depth repaired with the same thickness
ing be conducted to thoroughly investigate the causes of PCC, and then capped with AC to the same thick­
and extent of deterioration in the existing pavement ness as the existing AC Full-depth repairs and slab
replacements in AC/JPCP or AC/JRCP should be AC/
PCC, dowelled or tied to provide load transfer across
repair joints Some agencies have placed full-depth
5.7.2 Pre-overlay R epair
AC repairs in AC/JPCP and AC/JRCP prior to an AC
overlay However, this has often resulted in rough
The following types of distress in AC/JPCP, AC/
spots in the new overlay, opening of nearby joints and
JRCP, and AC/CRCP should be repaired prior to
cracks, and rapid deterioration of reflection cracks at
placement of an AC overlay
AC patch boundaries
AC/CRCP full-depth repairs should be AC/PCC
and should be continuously reinforced with steei
Distress Type R epair Type which is tied or welded to reinforcing steel in the
Rutting Milling existing slab, to provide load transfer across joints and
Deteriorated reflection Full-depth repair or slab continuity Full-depth AC repairs should not be
cracks slab replacement used in AC/CRCP prior to placement of an AC over­
Deteriorated repairs Full-depth repair lay, and any existing AC patches in AC/CRCP should
Punchouts Full-depth repair be removed and replaced with AC over continuously
Localized distress in AC only AC patching reinforced PCC Guidelines on repair are provided in
Localized distress in PCC Full-depth repair References 1 and 3
Pumping Edge drains Installation of edge drains, maintenance of existing
Settlements/heaves AC level-up, slab edge drains, or other subdrainage improvement should
jacking, or local­ be done prior to placement of the overlay if a sub­
ized reconstruction drainage evaluation indicates a need for such an im­
provement
Pressure relief joints should be placed only at fixed
structures, and not at regular intervals along the pave­
In AC/JPCP and AC/JRCP, medium- and high-se­ ment The only exception to this is where reactive
verity reflection cracks in the AC surface are evidence aggregate has caused expansion of the slab On heav­
of working cracks, deteriorated joints, or failed re­ ily trafficked routes, pressure relief joints should be of
pairs in the PCC slab, all of which should be full- heavy-duty design with dowels (3)
depth repaired Low-severity reflection cracks may
exist at regular joints and full-depth repair joints If
these cracks are sealed and do not appear to be deteri­ 5.7.3 Reflection C rack C ontrol
orating at a significant rate, they might not warrant
pre-overlay repair other than sealing Reflection cracking in an AC overlay of AC/JPCP,
In AC/CRCP, reflection cracks of all severities sug­ AC/JRCP, or AC/CRCP occurs over reflection cracks
gest the presence of working cracks, deteriorated con­ in the first AC overlay, and may also occur over new
struction joints, or failed repairs in the PCC slab, all repairs The basic mechanism of reflection cracking is
of which should be repaired Coring through selected strain concentration in the overlay due to movement in
111-128 Design o f Pavement Structures

the vicinity of joints and cracks in the existing pave­ occurrence and deterioration of new reflection cracks
ment This movement may be bending or shear in­ Improving subdrainage conditions and subsealing in
duced by loads, or may be horizontal contraction areas where the slab has lost support will also discour­
induced by temperature changes Load-induced move­ age reflection crack occurrence and deterioration Re­
ments are influenced by the thickness and stiffness of flection crack control treatments are not necessary for
the AC layers, the thickness of the PCC, the degree of AC overlays of AC/CRCP, except for longitudinal
load transfer at the joints and cracks, and the extent of joints, as long as continuously reinforced AC/PCC
loss of support under the PCC slab Temperature-in­ repairs are used to repair deteriorated areas and
duced movements are influenced by daily and seasonal cracks
temperature variations, the coefficients of thermal ex­
pansion of the existing pavement layers, and the spac­
ing of joints and cracks 5.7.4 Subdrainage
Pre-overlay repair, including full-depth repair, sub­
drainage improvement, and subsealing, is the most See Section 5 2 4 for guidelines
effective means of controlling reflection crack occur­
rence and deterioration in a second AC overlay of an
AC/JPCP or AC/JRCP pavement Additional reflec­ 5.7.5 Thickness Design
tion crack control treatments may be used as well,
including If the overlay is being placed for some functional
purpose such as roughness or friction, a minimum
(1) P lacing a synth etic fa b ric, stress-absorbin g in­ thickness overlay that solves the functional problem
terlayer, o r bitu m in ou s-stabilized granular
should be placed If the overlay is being placed for the =
la yer p r io r to o r in com bination with the A C purpose of structural improvement, the required thick­
overlay. ness of the overlay is a function of the structural ca­
(2) Sawing an d sealing jo in ts in the A C overlay at pacity required to meet future traffic demands and the
locations coinciding with reflection cracks and structural capacity of the existing pavement The re­
repair boundaries in the AC/JPCP or AC/ quired overlay thickness to increase structural capac­
JRCP This technique has been very successful ity to carry future traffic is determined by the
when applied to AC overlays of jointed PCC following equation
pavements when the sawcut matches the joint
or straight crack within an inch
(3) Increasing the A C overlay thickness Reflec­ D0i = A(Df — Deff)
tion cracks will take more time to propagate
through a thicker overlay and may deteriorate where
more slowly
Reflection cracking can have a considerable (often Dol = Required thickness of AC overlay, inches
controlling) influence on the life of an AC overlay of A = Factor to convert PCC thickness
AC/JPCP or AC/JRCP Deteriorated reflection cracks deficiency to AC overlay thickness
detract from a pavement’s serviceability and also re­ Df = Slab thickness to carry future traffic,
quire frequent maintenance, such as sealing, milling, inches
and patching Reflection cracks also permit water to Deff = Effective equivalent PCC slab thickness
enter the pavement structure, which may result in loss of existing AC/PCC, inches
of bond between the AC and PCC, stripping in the AC
layers, progression of “ D ” cracking or reactive aggre­ The A factor, which is a function of the PCC thick­
gate distress in PCC slabs with these durability prob­ ness deficiency, is given by the following equation and
lems, and softening of the base and subgrade For this is illustrated in Figure 5 9
reason, reflection cracks should be sealed as soon as
they appear and resealed periodically throughout the A = 2 2233 + 0 0099(Df - Deff)2
life of the overlay Sealing low-severity reflection
- 0 1534(Df - Deff)
cracks may also be effective in retarding their progres­
sion to medium and high severity levels
Repairing reflection cracks in existing AC/CRCP The required overlay thickness may be determined
prior to placement of an AC overlay will delay the through the following design steps These design steps
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-129

provide a comprehensive design approach that recom­ (4) Evidence of pumping of fines or water
mends testing the pavement to obtain valid design in­ (5) Mean rut depth
puts If it is not possible to conduct this testing (e g ,
for a low-volume road), an approximate overlay de­ Step 4: Deflection testing
sign may be developed based upon visible distress (strongly recommended).
observations by skipping Steps 4 and 5, and by esti­
mating other inputs Measure slab deflection basins along the project at
The overlay design can be done for a uniform sec­ an interval sufficient to adequately assess conditions
tion or on a point-by-point basis as described in Sec­ Intervals of 100 to 1,000 feet are typical Measure
tion 5 3 1 deflections with sensors located at 0, 12, 24, and 36
inches from the center of the load Measure deflec­
Step 1: Existing pavem ent design. tions in the outer wheel path, unless rutting of the AC
surface interferes with proper seating of the load
(1) Existing AC surface thickness
plate, in which case deflections should be measured
(2) Existing PCC slab thickness
(3) Type of load transfer (mechanical devices, ag­ between the wheelpaths A heavy-load deflection de­
gregate interlock, CRCP) vice (e g , Falling Weight Deflectometer) and a load
(4) Type of shoulder (tied PCC, other) magnitude of 9,000 pounds are recommended ASTM
D 4694 and D 4695 provide additional guidance on
Step 2: Traffic analysis. deflection testing

(1) Predicted future 18-kip ESALs in the design (1) Temperature o f AC mix The temperature of the
lane over the design period (Nf) AC mix during deflection testing must be de­
Use ESALs computed from rigid pavement termined This may be measured directly by
load equivalency factors drilling a hole into the AC surface, inserting a
liquid and a temperature probe, and reading
Step 3: Condition survey. the AC mix temperature when it has stabilized
The following distresses are measured during the This should be done at least three times during
condition survey Sampling along the most heavily each day’s testing, so that a curve of AC mix
trafficked lane of the project may be used to estimate temperature versus time may be developed and
these quantities Distress types and severities are de­ used to assign a mix temperature to each basin
fined in Reference 23 Deteriorated means medium or If measured AC mix temperatures are not
higher severity available, they may be approximated from cor­
relations with pavement surface and air tem­
AC/JPCP OR AC/JRCP:
peratures (24, 25, 26, 27) Pavement surface
(1) Number of deteriorated reflection cracks per temperature may be monitored during deflec­
mile tion testing using a hand-held infrared sensing
(2) Number of full-depth AC patches and expan­ device which is aimed at the pavement The
sion joints per mile (except at bridges) mean air temperature for the five days prior to
(3) Evidence of pumping of fines or water at deflection testing, which is an input to some of
cracks and pavement edge the referenced methods for estimating mix
(4) Mean rut depth temperature, may be obtained from a local
(5) Number of localized failures weather station or other local sources
The following distresses are measured during the (2) Elastic modulus o f AC The modulus of the AC
condition survey for AC/CRCP Sampling may be layer should be determined for each deflection
used to estimate these quantities basin Two methods are available for determin­
ing the AC modulus, Eac
AC/CRCP: (a) Estimate Eac from AC mix temperature
(1) Number of unrepaired punchouts per mile The elastic modulus of the AC layer may
(2) Number of unrepaired reflection cracks per be estimated from AC mix properties and
mile the AC mix temperature assigned to a
(3) Number of unrepaired existing deteriorated re­ deflection basin using the following
pairs and full-depth AC repairs per mile equation (26)
Ill-130 Design o f Pavement Structures

log Ea Each agency should establish its own

relationship for AC modulus versus tem­
r 200
= 5 553833 + 0 028829 perature which is representative of the
jO 17033
properties of its AC mixes
- 0 03476Vv + 0 070377ri70oF106 It should be noted that the equation
for AC modulus as a function of mix pa­
+ 0 000005t{,' 3+0 49825 log F)p0 5
rameters and temperature applies to new
mixes AC which has been in service for
_ 0 00189 (1 3+o 49825 log F)p0 5
pi 1 lP ac some years may have either a higher
modulus (due to hardening of the as­
1 phalt) or lower modulus (due to deterio­
+ 0 931757 j0 02774 ration of the AC, from stripping or other
causes) at any given temperature
(b) Diametral resilient modulus testing of
where AC cores taken from the in-service AC/
PCC pavement, as described in Step 5,
elastic modulus of AC, may be used to establish a relationship
psi between AC modulus and temperature
r 200 percent aggregate passing This relationship may be used to deter­
the No 200 sieve mine the AC modulus of each deflection
F loading frequency, Hz basin at the time and temperature at
Vv air voids, percent which it was measured
Tl70oF,106 absolute viscosity at (3) Effective dynamic k-value beneath PCC slab
70°F, 106 poise (e g , 1 Compute the compression which occurs in the
for AC-10, 2 for AC-20) AC overlay beneath the load plate using the
asphalt content, percent following equations
by weight of mix
AC mix temperature, °F
AC, PCC LAYERS BONDED
This may be reduced to a relationship
between A C modulus and A C mix tem­ ^0 compress = - 0 0000328 + 121 5006
perature for a particular loading fre­ r\ \ 10798
*-'3
quency (i e , approximately 18 Hz for
the FWD load duration of 2 5 to 3 0 milli­
seconds) by assuming typical values for
the A C mix parameters Pac> V v, P 200 , and AC, PCC LAYERS UNBONDED
q For example, the A C mix design used
by one State has the following typical ^0 compress = - 0 00002133 + 38 6872
values: ' tn \0 94551
" 9 ,

P200 =
4 percent
Vv percent
= 5
T|7o°p 10® = 2 for A C -2 0 where
Pac = 5 percent
d0compress = AC compression at center of
For these values and an FWD loading load, inches
frequency of 18 Hz, the following equa­ Dac = AC thickness, inches
tion for A C elastic modulus versus AC E ac = AC elastic modulus, psi
mix temperature is obtained:
The interface condition is a significant un­
known in backcalculation The AC/PCC inter­
log Eac = 6 451235
face is fully bonded when the AC layer is first
- 0 0 0 0 1 6467l t j 92544 placed, but how well that bond is retained is
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-131

not known Examination of cores taken at a presented in Part II, Section 3 2 1 However,
later time may show that bond has been re­ the k-value can change substantially and have
duced or completely lost This is particularly only a small effect on overlay thickness
likely if stripping occurs at the AC/PCC inter­ (5) Elastic modulus o f PCC slab (E) Enter Figure
face If the current interface bonding condition 5 11 with the AREApcc of the top of the PCC
is not determined by coring, the bonding con­ slab, proceed to the effective dynamic k-value
dition which is considered more representative curves, and determine a value for ED3, where
of the project may be assumed D is the PCC slab thickness Solve for E know­
Using the above equations, the do of the ing the slab thickness, D Typical slab E values
PCC slab in the AC/PCC pavement may be range from 3 to 8 million psi If a slab E value
determined by subtracting the compression is obtained out of this range, an error may exist
which occurs in the AC surface from the do in the assumed slab thickness, the deflection
measured at the AC surface basin may have been measured over a crack, or
Compute the AREA of the PCC slab for the PCC may be significantly deteriorated
each deflection basin from the following equa­ If a single overlay thickness is being de­
tion signed for a uniform section, compute the
mean E value of the slabs tested in the uniform
section
■*24
AREApcc = 6 * 1 + 2 + 2 Do not use any k-values or E values that
A) pec, dop appear to be significantly out of line with the
■*36
rest of the data
(6) Joint load transfer. For AC/JPCP and AC/
do pcc/ _
JRCP, measure joint load transfer in the outer
wheelpath (or between the wheelpaths if the
where AC is badly rutted) at representative reflection
cracks above transverse joints in the PCC slab
do pcc = PCC deflection in center of Do not measure load transfer when the ambi­
loading plate, inches (surface ent temperature is greater than 80 °F Place the
deflection do minus AC load plate on one side of the reflection crack
compression d0compress) with the edge of the plate touching the joint
di = deflections at 12, 24, and 36 Measure the deflection at the center of the load
inches from plate center, inches plate and at 12 inches from the center Com­
pute the deflection load transfer from the fol­
Enter Figure 5 10 with the dopCc and lowing equation
AREApcc of the PCC slab to determine the ef­
fective dynamic k-value beneath the slab for a
circular load radius of 5 9 inches and magni­ ALT = 100 *
A ui
*B
tude of 9,000 pounds Note that for loads
within 2,000 pounds more or less, deflections
may be scaled linearly to 9,000-pound deflec­
where
tions
If a single overlay thickness is being de­ ALT = deflection load transfer, percent
signed for a uniform section, compute the AU| = unloaded side deflection, inches
mean effective dynamic k-value of the slabs Ai = loaded side deflection, inches
tested in the uniform section B = slab bending and AC compression
(4) Effective static k-value correction factor

Effective static k-value The slab bending and AC compression cor­

rection factor, B, is necessary because the de­
= Effective dynamic k-value/2 flections d0 and d 12, measured 12 inches apart,
would not be equal even if measured in the
The effective static k-value may need to be ad­ interior of a slab An appropriate value for the
justed for seasonal effects using the approach correction factor may be determined from the
132 Design o f Pavement Structures

ratio of do to d 12 for typical center slab deflec­ For purposes of interpreting NDT data, AC
tion basin measurements, as shown in the modulus values obtained from laboratory test­
equation below ing of cores must be adjusted to account for the
difference between the loading frequency of
the test apparatus (typically 1 to 2 Hz) and the
B ^O center
= T ~ loading frequency of the deflection testing de­
^12 center vice (18 Hz for the FWD) This adjustment is
made by multiplying the laboratory-deter­
If a single overlay thickness is being designed mined Eac by a constant value which may be
for a uniform section, compute the mean de­ determined for each laboratory testing temper­
flection load transfer value of the joints tested ature using the equation given in Step 4 for AC
in the uniform section modulus as a function of mix parameters and
For AC/JPCP and AC/JRCP, determine the temperature Field-frequency Eac values will
J load transfer coefficient using the following typically be 2 to 2 5 times higher than lab-
guidelines frequency values
Agencies may also wish to establish corre­
lations between resilient modulus and indirect
Percent Load Transfer J tensile strength for specific AC mixes
>70 32 (2) PCC modulus o f rupture (S'c) Cut several 6-
50-70 35 inch-diameter cores at midslab and test in indi­
<50 40 rect tension (ASTM C 496) Compute the indi­
rect tensile strength (psi) of the cores Estimate
the modulus of rupture with the following
If the rehabilitation will include the addi­ equation
tion of a tied concrete shoulder, a lower J fac­
tor may be appropriate See Part II, Table 2 6
S'c = 2 1 0 + 1 02IT
For AC/CRCP, use J = 2 2 to 2 6 for over­
lay design, assuming that working cracks are
repaired with continuously reinforced PCC where
overlaid with AC
Sa = modulus of rupture, psi
5: Coring and materials testing IT = indirect tensile strength of
(strongly recommended). 6-inch-diameter cores, psi
Modulus o f AC surface Laboratory testing of
cores taken from the AC surface in uncracked Step 6: Determination o f required slab thickness
areas may be used to determine the elastic fo r future traffic (Df )
modulus of the AC surface This may be done
The inputs to determine Df for AC overlays of AC/
using a repeated-load indirect tension test
(ASTM D 4123) The tests should be run at PCC pavements are representative of the existing slab
and foundation properties This is emphasized be­
two or more temperatures (e g , 40, 70, and
cause it is the properties of the existing slab (i e ,
90°F) to establish points for a curve of log Eac
elastic modulus, modulus of rupture, and load trans­
versus temperature AC modulus values at any
fer) which will control the performance of the AC
temperature may be interpolated from the labo­
overlay
ratory values obtained at any two tempera­
tures For example, Eac values at 70° and 90 °F (1) Effective static k-value beneath existing PCC
may be used in the following equation to inter­ slab Determine from one of the following
polate Eac at any temperature t°F methods
(a) Backcalculate effective dynamic k-value
from deflection basins as described in
, Eac7o°F ~ *°8 Eac90°F\
log Eact°F = \ ; Step 4 Divide the effective dynamic k-
value by 2 to obtain the effective static k-
* (t°F - 70°F) + log E ac70°F value The effective static k-value may
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-133

need to be adjusted for seasonal effects (b) Estimated from indirect tensile strength.
using the approach presented in Part II, (6) Loss o f support o f existing slab that might exist
Section 3 2 1 after rehabilitation Procedures for use of de­
(b) Conduct plate load tests (ASTM D 1196) flection testing to investigate loss of support
after slab removal at a few sites This beneath AC/PCC pavements have not yet been
alternative is very costly and time-con­ established For overlay thickness design as­
suming and not often used The static k- sume the slab is fully supported, LS = 0
value obtained may need to be adjusted (7) Overlay design reliability, R (percent) See
for seasonal effects (see Part II, Section Part I, Section 4 2, Part II, Table 2 2, and Part
3 2 1) III, Section 5 2 15
(c) Estimate from soils data and base type (8) Overall standard deviation, Sa, fo r PCC pave­
and thickness, using Figure 3 3 in Part ment See Part I, Section 4 3
II, Section 3 2 This alternative is sim­ (9) Subdrainage capability o f existing slab, after
ple, but the static k-value obtained must subdrainage improvements, i f any. See Part II,
be recognized as a rough estimate The Table 2 5, as well as reference 5, for guidance
static k-value obtained may need to be in determining Cd Pumping or faulting at re­
adjusted for seasonal effects (see Part II, flection cracks is evidence that a subdrainage
Section 3 2 1) problem exists In selecting this value, note
(2) Design PSI loss PSI immediately after overlay that the poor drainage situation at the AASHO
(PI) minus PSI at time of next rehabilitation Road Test would be given a Cd of 1 0
(P 2 )
Compute Df for the above design inputs using the
(3) J, load transfer o f existing PCC slab See
rigid pavement design equation or nomograph in Part
Step 4
II, Figure 3 7 When designing an overlay thickness
(4) PCC modulus o f rupture, determined by one of
for a uniform pavement section, mean input values
the following methods
must be used When designing an overlay thickness
(a) Estimate from indirect tensile strength
for specific points along the project, the data for that
measured from 6-inch-diameter cores, as
point must be used A worksheet for determining Df is
described in Step 5
provided in Table 5 9 Typical values of inputs are
(b) For AC/JPCP and AC/JRCP, estimate
provided for guidance Values outside these ranges
from the E of the slab, backcalculated as
should be used with caution
described in Step 4 Use the following
equation
Step 7: Determination o f effective slab thickness
(Deff) o f existing pavement.

s ; . = 43 5 ( — 6 | + 488 5 A condition survey method for determination of

Deff is presented for AC/PCC pavements The effec­
tive thickness of the existing slab (Deff) is computed
where from the following equation

S{. = modulus of rupture, psi

Da * Fnr
E = backcalculated elastic modulus Deff — (Dpcc * Fjc * F dur) +
20
of PCC slab, psi

For AC/CRCP, estimating S' from where

backcalculated E values is not recom­
mended since cracks which are not re­ D,pcc = thickness of existing PCC slab, inches
flected in the existing AC overlay may Dac = thickness of existing AC surface, inches
exist in the CRCP within the deflection
basins (1) Joints and cracks adjustment factor (Fjc) This
(5) Elastic modulus o f existing PCC slab, deter­ factor adjusts for the extra loss in PSI caused
mined by one of the following methods: by deteriorated reflection cracks that will oc­
(a) Backcalculated from deflection measure­ cur in a second overlay due to unrepaired
ments, as described in Step 4 deteriorated reflection cracks and other dis-
.134 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 5.9. W orksheet for D eterm ination of Df for AC/JPCP, AC/JRCP, and AC/CRCP

SLAB:
Existing AC suiface thickness = inches
Existing PCC slab thickness = inches
Type of load transfer system mechanical device, aggregate interlock, CRCP
Type of shoulder = tied PCC, other
PCC modulus of rupture (typically 600 to 800 psi) = ________________________psi

PCC E modulus (3 to 8 million psi for sound PCC,

< 3 million for unsound PCC) = ________________________psi
J load transfer factor (3 2 to 4 0 for AC/JPCP,
AC/JRCP 2 2 to 2 6 for AC/CRCP) = _________________________

TRAFFIC:
Future 18-kip ESALs in design lane over
the design period (Nf) = ________________________

SUPPORT AND DRAINAGE:

Effective dynamic k-value = psi/inch
Effective static k-value = Effective dynamic k-value/2
(typically 50 to 500 psi/inch) = psi/inch
Subdrainage coefficient, Cd
(typically 1 0 for poor subdrainage conditions) = _________________________

SERVICEABILITY LOSS:
Design PSI loss (PI — P2) = ________________________

RELIABILITY:
Design reliability, R (80 to 99 percent) = ________________________ percent
Overall standard deviation, S0 (typically 0 39) = ________________________

FUTURE STRUCTURAL CAPACITY:

Required slab thickness for future traffic is determined from rigid pavement
design equation or nomograph in Part II, Figure 3 7
Df = ________________________ inches

continuities in the existing AC/PCC pavement and any other major discontinuities in the ex­
prior to overlay A deteriorated reflection crack isting pavement be full-depth repaired with
in the existing AC/PCC pavement will rapidly dowelled or tied PCC repairs prior to overlay,
reflect through a second overlay and contribute so that Fjc = 1 00
to loss of serviceability Therefore, it is recom­ If it is not possible to repair all deteriorated
mended that all deteriorated reflection cracks areas, the following information is needed to
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-135

determine Fjc, to increase the overlay thickness 0 80-0 88: Severe AC material distress
to account for the extra loss in PSI from deteri­ (rutting, stripping, shoving)
orated reflection cracks:
A worksheet for calculation of Deff is provided
Number of unrepaired deteriorated reflec­ in Table 5 10
tion cracks/mile
Number of unrepaired punchouts/mile Step 8: Determination o f Overlay Thickness.
Number of expansion joints, exceptionally The thickness of AC overlay is computed as fol­
wide joints (greater than 1 inch), and lows:
full-depth, full-lane-width AC patches/
mile
D0i — A(Df — Deff)
The total number of unrepaired deteriorated
reflection cracks, punchouts, and other discon­
where
tinuities per mile is used to determine the Fjc
from Figure 5 12
Dol = Required thickness of AC overlay, inches
(2) Durability adjustment factor (Fdur) This factor
A = Factor to convert PCC thickness
adjusts for an extra loss in PSI of the overlay
deficiency to AC overlay thickness
when the existing slab has durability problems
Df = Slab thickness determined in Step 6,
such as “ D ” cracking or reactive aggregate
inches
distress Using historical records and condi­
Deff = Effective thickness of existing slab
tion survey data from Step 3, Fdur is deter­
determined in Step 7, inches
mined as follows

1 00: No evidence or history of PCC The A factor, which is a function of the PCC thick­
durability problems ness deficiency, is given by the following equation and
0 96-0 99 Pavement is known to have PCC is illustrated in Figure 5 9
durability problems, but no
localized failures or related A = 2 2233 + 0 0099(Df - Deff)2
distresses are visible
0 88-0 95: Some durability distress - 0 1534(Df - D ^ )
(localized failures, etc ) is
visible at pavement surface The thickness of overlay determined from the
0 80-0 88 Extensive durability distress above relationship should be reasonable when the
(localized failures, etc ) is overlay is required to correct a structural deficiency
visible at pavement surface See Section 5 2 for discussion of factors which may
result in unreasonable overlay thicknesses
(3) AC quality adjustment factor (Fac) This factor
adjusts the existing AC layer’s contribution to
Deff based on the quality of the AC material
The value selected should depend only on dis­ 5.7.6 Surface Milling
tresses related to the AC layer (i e , not reflec­
tion cracking) which are not eliminated by If the AC surface is to be milled prior to overlay,
surface milling rutting, stripping, shoving, the depth of milling should be considered in the deter­
mination of Deff No adjustment need be made to Deff
and also weathering and ravelling if the surface
is not milled Consideration should be given to values if the depth of milling does not exceed the
complete removal of a poor-quality AC layer minimum necessary to remove surface ruts If a
greater depth is milled, the AC thickness remaining
1 00 No AC material distress after milling should be used in determining Deff
0 96-0 99: Minor AC material distress
(weathering, ravelling) not
corrected by surface milling 5.7.7 Shoulders
0 88-0 95: Significant AC material distress
(rutting, stripping, shoving) See Section 5 2 10 for guidelines
III-136 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 5.10. C alculation of Deff for AC Overlay of AC/JPCP, AC/JRCP, and AC/CRCP

Condition Survey Method:

Fjc Number of unrepaired deteriorated reflection cracks/mile = __________
Number of punchouts/mile = ___________
Number of expansion joints, exceptionally wide joints
( > 1 inch) or full-depth patches/mile = ___________
Total/mile = ___________
Fjc = ------------------------------------(Figure 5 12)
(Recommended value 1 0, repair all deteriorated areas)

F dur 1 00: No sign or knowledge of PCC durability problems

0 96-0 99: Pavement is known to have PCC durability problems, but no
localized failures or related distresses
0 88-0 95: Some durability distress (localized failures, etc ) is visible at
pavement surface
0 80-0 88: Extensive durability distress (localized failures, etc )
P
r dur = -----------------------------------------

1 00: No AC material distress

0 96-0 99 Minor AC material distress (weathering, ravelling) not corrected
by surface milling
0 88-0 95 Significant AC material distress (rutting, stripping, shoving)
0 80-0 88: Severe AC material distress (rutting, stripping, shoving)
F
J. o p = — ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dac
Deff = (Dpcc * Fjc * F dur) +
20

5.7.8 Widening (1) Repairing deteriorated areas and making

subdrainage improvements (if needed)
See Section 5 2 16 for guidelines (2) Constructing widening (if needed)
(3) Preparing the existing surface to ensure a
reliable bond
(4) Placing the concrete overlay
5.8 BONDED CONCRETE OVERLAY OF (5) Sawing and sealing the joints
JPCP, JRCP, AND CRCP

Bonded concrete overlays have been placed on 5.8.1 Feasibility

jointed plain, jointed reinforced and continuously re­
inforced concrete pavements to improve both struc­ A bonded overlay of JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP is a
tural capacity and functional condition A bonded feasible rehabilitation alternative for PCC pavements
concrete overlay consists of the following construction except when the conditions of the existing pavement
tasks dictate substantial removal and replacement or when
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-137

durability problems exist (28) Conditions under be done prior to placement of the overlay if a sub­
which a PCC bonded overlay would not be feasible drainage evaluation indicates a need for such an im­
include: provement
Pressure relief joints should be done only at fixed
(1) The amount of deteriorated slab cracking and structures, and not at regular intervals along the pave­
joint spalling is so great that a substantial ment The only exception to this is where a reactive
amount of removal and replacement of the ex­ aggregate has caused expansion of the slab On heav­
isting surface is dictated ily trafficked routes, expansion joints should be of the
(2) Significant deterioration of the PCC slab has heavy-duty type with dowels (3) If joints contain sig­
occurred due to durability problems (e g , nificant incompressibles, they should be cleaned and
“ D ” cracking or reactive aggregates) This resealed prior to overlay placement
will affect performance of the overlay
(3) Vertical clearance at bridges is inadequate for
required overlay thickness This is not usually
5.8.3 Reflection Crack Control
a problem because bonded overlays are usually
fairly thin
Any working (spalled) cracks in the existing JPCP,
If construction duration is critical, PCC overlays JRCP, or CRCP slab may reflect through the bonded
may utilize high-early-strength PCC mixes PCC concrete overlay within one year Reflection cracks
overlays have been opened within 6 to 24 hours after can be controlled in bonded overlays by full-depth
placement using these mixtures repair of working cracks in the existing pavement, and
for JPCP or JRCP, sawing and sealing joints through
the overlay directly over the repair joints Tight non­
working cracks do not need to be repaired because not
5.8.2 Pre-overlay Repair all will reflect through the overlay and those that do
will usually remain tight Tight cracks in CRCP will
The following types of distress should be repaired take several years to reflect through, and even then
prior to placement of the bonded PCC overlay will remain tight

Distress Type Repair Type 5.8.4 Subdrainage

Working cracks Full-depth repair or slab
replacement See Section 5 2 4 for guidelines
Punchouts Full-depth repair
Spalled joints Full- or partial-depth repair
Deteriorated patches Full-depth repair 5.8.5 Thickness Design
Pumping/faulting Edge drains
Settlements/heaves Slab jack or reconstruct area If the overlay is being placed for some functional
purpose such as roughness or friction, a minimum
thickness overlay that solves the functional problem
Full-depth repairs and slab replacements in JPCP should be placed
and JRCP should be PCC, dowelled or tied to provide If the overlay is being placed for the purpose of
load transfer across repair joints Full-depth repairs in structural improvement, the required thickness of the
CRCP should be PCC and should be continuously overlay is a function of the structural capacity required
reinforced with steel which is tied or welded to rein­ to meet future traffic demands and the structural ca­
forcing steel in the existing slab, to provide load trans­ pacity of the existing pavement The required overlay
fer across joints and slab continuity Full-depth AC thickness to increase structural capacity to carry fu­
repairs should not be used prior to placement of a ture traffic is determined by the following equation
bonded PCC overlay, and any existing AC patches
should be removed and replaced with PCC Guide­ Dnl — D f D,eff
lines on repairs are provided in References 1 and 3
Installation of edge drains, maintenance of existing
edge drains, or other subdrainage improvement should where
111-138 Design o f Pavement Structures

Dol = Required thickness of bonded PCC (3) Number of existing expansion joints, excep­
overlay, inches tionally wide joints ( > 1 inch) or AC full-
Df = Slab thickness to carry future traffic, depth patches
inches (4) Presence and general severity of PCC durabil­
Deff = Effective thickness of existing slab, ity problems
inches (a) “ D ” cracking low severity (cracks
only), medium severity (some spalling),
Bonded concrete overlays have been successfully high severity (severe spalling)
constructed as thin as 2 inches and as thick as 6 inches (b) Reactive aggregate cracking: low, me­
or more Three to 4 inches has been typical for most dium, high severity
highway pavement overlays (28) If the bonded over­ (5) Evidence of faulting, pumping of fines or
lay is being placed only for a functional purpose such
water at joints, cracks and pavement edge
as roughness or friction, a thickness of 3 inches
should be adequate
CRCP:
The required overlay thickness may be determined
through the following design steps These design steps
(1) Number of punchouts per mile
provide a comprehensive design approach that recom­
(2) Number of deteriorated transverse cracks per
mends testing the pavement to obtain valid design in­
mile
puts If it is not possible to conduct this testing, an
(3) Number of existing expansion joints, excep­
approximate overlay design may be developed based
tionally wide joints (> 1 inch) or AC full-
upon visible distress observations by skipping Steps 4
and 5, and by estimating other inputs depth patches
The overlay design can be done for a uniform sec­ (4) Number of existing and new repairs prior to
tion or on a point-by-point basis as described in overlay per mile
Section 5 3 1 (5) Presence and general severity of PCC durabil­
ity problems (N o te : surface spalling of tight
Step 1: Existing pavement design. cracks where the underlying CRCP is sound
should not be considered a durability problem)
(1) Existing slab thickness
(a) “ D ” cracking low severity (cracks
(2) Type of load transfer (mechanical devices, ag­
only), medium severity (some spalling),
gregate interlock, CRCP)
high severity (severe spalling)
(3) Type of shoulder (tied, PCC, other)
(b) Reactive aggregate cracking low, me­
Step 2: Traffic analysis. dium, high severity
(6) Evidence of pumping of fines or water
(1) Past cumulative 18-kip ESALs in the design
lane (Np), for use in the remaining life method
of Deff determination only Step 4: Deflection testing
(2) Predicted future 18-kip ESALs in the design (strongly recommended).
lane over the design period (Nf)
Measure slab deflection basins in the outer wheel
Step 3: Condition survey. path along the project at an interval sufficient to ade­
quately assess conditions Intervals of 100 to 1,000
The following distresses are measured during the
feet are typical Measure deflections with sensors lo­
condition survey for JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP Sam­
cated at 0, 12, 24, and 36 inches from the center of
pling along the project may be used to estimate these
quantities in the most heavily trafficked lane Distress load A heavy-load deflection device (e g , Falling
types and severities are defined in Reference 23 Dete­ Weight Deflectometer) and a load magnitude of 9,000
riorated means medium or higher severity pounds are recommended ASTM D 4694 and D 4695
provide additional guidance on deflection testing
JPCP/JRCP: For each slab tested, backcalculate the effective k-
(1) Number of deteriorated transverse joints per value and the slab’s elastic modulus using Figures
mile 5 10 and 5 11 or a backcalculation procedure The
(2) Number of deteriorated transverse cracks per AREA of each deflection basin is computed as fol­
mile lows
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-139

(4) Joint load transfer. For JPCP and JRCP, mea­

sure joint load transfer in the outer wheelpath
at representative transverse joints Do not
measure load transfer when the ambient tem­
where perature is greater than 80°F Place the load
plate on one side of the joint with the edge of
do = deflection in center of loading plate, inches the plate touching the joint Measure the de­
dj = deflections at 12, 24, and 36 inches from flection at the center of the load plate and at 12
plate center, inches inches from the center Compute the deflection
load transfer from the following equation
AREA will typically range from 29 to 32 for sound
concrete
ALT = 100 * *B
(1) Effective dynamic k-value Enter Figure 5 10
with do and AREA to determine the effective
dynamic k-value beneath each slab for a circu­ where
lar load radius of 5 9 inches and magnitude of
9,000 pounds Note that for loads within 2,000
ALT = deflection load transfer, percent
pounds more or less, deflections may be scaled
Aul = unloaded side deflection, inches
linearly to 9,000-pound deflections
A) = loaded side deflection, inches
If a single overlay thickness is being de­
B = slab bending correction factor
signed for a uniform section, compute the
mean effective dynamic k-value of the slabs
The slab bending correction factor, B, is
tested in the uniform section
necessary because the deflections d0 and d,2,
(2) Effective static k-value
measured 12 inches apart, would not be equal
even if measured in the interior of a slab An
Effective static k-value appropriate value for the correction factor may
be determined from the ratio of d0 to d 12 for
= Effective dynamic k-value/2 typical center slab deflection basin measure­
ments, as shown in the equation below Typical
The effective k-value may need to be adjusted values for B are between 1 05 and 1 15
for seasonal effects using the approach pre­
sented in Part II, Section 3 2 1 However, the B ^0 center
k-value can change substantially and have only = j -------
2 center
a small effect on overlay thickness
(3) Elastic modulus o f PCC slab (E) Enter Figure
If a single overlay thickness is being designed
5 11 with AREA, proceed to the effective dy­
for a uniform section, compute the mean de­
namic k-value curves, and determine a value
flection load transfer value of the joints tested
for ED3, where D is the slab thickness Solve
in the uniform section
for E knowing the slab thickness, D Typical
For JPCP and JRCP, determine the J load
slab E values range from 3 to 8 million psi If a
transfer coefficient using the following guide­
slab E value is obtained that is out of this
lines:
range, an error may exist in the assumed slab
thickness, the deflection basin may have been
measured over a crack, or the PCC may be Percent Load Transfer J
significantly deteriorated >70 3 2
If a single overlay thickness is being de­ 50-70 3 5
signed for a uniform section, compute the <50 4 0
mean E value of the slabs tested in the uniform
section
Do not use any k-values or E values that If the rehabilitation will include the addition of
appear to be significantly out of line with the a tied concrete shoulder, a lower J factor may
rest of the data be appropriate See Part II, Table 2 6
111-140 Design o f Pavement Structures

For CRCP, use J = 2 2 to 2 6 for overlay be recognized as a rough estimate The

design, assuming that working cracks and static k-value obtained may need to be
punchouts are repaired with continuously rein­ adjusted for seasonal effects using the
forced PCC approach presented in Part II, Section
32 1
(2) Design PSI loss PSI immediately after overlay
Step 5: Coring and materials testing
(PI) minus PSI at time of next rehabilitation
(strongly recommended).
(P2)
(1) PCC modulus o f rupture (S'c) Cut several 6- (3) J, load transfer factor. See Step 4
inch-diameter cores at mid-slab and test in in­ (4) PCC modulus o f rupture determined by one of
direct tension (ASTM C 496) Compute the the following methods
indirect tensile strength (psi) of the cores Esti­ (a) Estimated from indirect tensile strength
mate the modulus of rupture with the following measured from 6-inch diameter cores as
equation: described in Step 5
(b) Estimated from the backcalculated E of
slab using the following equation
S'c = 2 1 0 + 1 02IT

where S'c = 43 5 + 488 5

Sj = modulus of rupture, psi

IT = indirect tensile strength of 6-inch where
diameter cores, psi
S[. = modulus of rupture, psi
E = backcalculated elastic modulus
Step 6: Determination o f required slab thickness
of PCC slab, psi
fo r fu tu re traffic (Df).

The inputs to determine Df for bonded PCC over­ For CRCP, S^ may be determined
lays of PCC pavements are representative of the from the backcalculated E values only at
existing slab and foundation properties This is em­ points which have no cracks within the
phasized because it is the properties of the existing deflection basins
slab (i e , elastic modulus, modulus of rupture, and (5) Elastic modulus o f existing PCC slab, deter­
load transfer) which will control the performance of mined by one of the following methods:
the bonded overlay (a) Backcalculate from deflection measure­
ments as described in Step 4
(1) Effective static k-value Determine from one of (b) Estimate from indirect tensile strength
the following methods (6) Loss o f support o f existing slab Joint corners
(a) Backcalculate the effective dynamic k- that have loss of support may be identified us­
value from deflection basins as described ing FWD deflection testing as described in
in Step 4 Divide the effective dynamic Reference 2 CRCP loss of support can be de­
k-value by 2 to obtain the effective static termined by plotting a slab edge or wheel path
k-value deflection profile and identifying locations
(b) Conduct plate load tests (ASTM D 1196) with significantly high deflections Existing
after slab removal at a few sites This loss of support can be improved with slab sta­
alternative is very costly and time-con­ bilization For thickness design, assume a
suming and not often used The static k- fully supported slab, LS = 0
value obtained may need to be adjusted (7) Overlay design reliability, R (percent) See
for seasonal effects using the approach Part I, Section 4 2, Part II, Table 2 2, and Part
presented in Part II, Section 3 2 1 III, Section 5 2 15
(c) Estimate from soils data and base type (8) Overall standard deviation (SJ fo r rigid pave­
and thickness, using Figure 3 3 in Part ment See Part I, Section 4 3
II, Section 3 2 This alternative is sim­ (9) Subdrainage capability o f existing slab, after
ple, but the static k-value obtained must subdrainage improvements, i f any. See Part II,
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-141

Table 2 5, as well as Reference 5, for guidance determine F jC, to increase the overlay thickness
in determining Cd Pumping or faulting at to account for the extra loss in PSI from deteri­
joints and cracks determined in Step 3 is evi­ orated reflection cracks (per design lane)
dence that a subdrainage problem exists In
Pavements with no “ D ” cracking or reactive
selecting this value, note that the poor sub­
aggregate distress:
drainage situation at the AASHO Road Test
Number of unrepaired deteriorated joints/
would be given a Cd of 1 0
mile
Compute Df for the above design inputs using the Number of unrepaired deteriorated cracks/
rigid pavement design equation or nomograph in Part mile
II, Figure 3 7 When designing an overlay thickness Number of unrepaired punchouts/mile
for a uniform pavement section, mean input values Number of expansion joints, exceptionally
must be used When designing an overlay thickness wide joints (greater than 1 inch), and
for specific points along the project, the data for that full-depth, full-lane-width AC patches/
point must be used A worksheet for determining Df is mile
provided in Table 5 11 Typical values of inputs are N ote that tight cracks held together by
provided for guidance Values outside these ranges reinforcement in JRCP or CRCP are not in­
should be used with caution cluded However, if a crack in JRCP or
CRCP is spalled and faulted the steel has
Step 7: Determination o f effective slab thickness probably ruptured, and the crack should be
(Deff) o f existing pavement. considered as working Surface spalling of
The condition survey and remaining life proce­ CRCP cracks is not an indication that the
dures are presented crack is working
The total number of unrepaired deterio­
rated joints, cracks, punchouts, and other
Deff From Condition Survey For PCC Pavements discontinuities per mile is used to determine
the FjCfrom Figure 5 12
The effective thickness of the existing slab (Deff) is
computed from the following equation Pavements with “ D ” cracking or reactive ag­
gregate deterioration
These types of pavements often have de­
Deff = F jc * F dur * F fat * D
terioration at the joints and cracks from du­
where rability problems The Fdur factor is used to
adjust the overlay thickness for this prob­
D = existing PCC slab thickness, inches lem Therefore, when this is the case, the
FjCshould be determined from Figure 5 12
(1) Joints and cracks adjustment factor (Fjc) This only using those unrepaired deteriorated
factor adjusts for the extra loss in PSI caused joints and cracks that are not caused by du­
by deteriorated reflection cracks in the overlay rability problems If all of the deteriorated
that will result from any unrepaired deterio­ joints and cracks are spalling due to “ D ”
rated joints, cracks, and other discontinuities cracking or reactive aggregate, then Fjc =
in the existing slab prior to overlay A deterio­ 1 0 This will avoid adjusting twice with the
rated joint or crack in the existing slab will FjCand Fdur factors
rapidly reflect through an AC overlay and con­
(2) Durability adjustment factor (Fdur) This factor
tribute to loss of serviceability Therefore, it is
adjusts for an extra loss in PSI of the overlay
recommended that all deteriorated joints and
when the existing slab has durability problems
cracks (for non-“ D ” cracked or reactive ag­
such as “ D ” cracking or reactive aggregate
gregate related distressed pavements) and any
distress Using condition survey data from
other major discontinuities in the existing slab
Step 3, Fdur is determined as follows
be full-depth repaired with dowelled or tied
PCC repairs prior to overlay, so that Fjc = 1 00 No sign of PCC durability
1 00 problems
If it is not possible to repair all deteriorated 0 96-0 99: Durability cracking exists, but
areas, the following information is needed to no spalling
III-142 Design of Pavement Structures

Table 5.11. W orksheet for D eterm ination of Df for JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP

SLAB:
Existing PCC slab thickness = inches
Type of load transfer system mechanical device, aggregate interlock, CRCP
Type of shoulder = tied PCC, other
PCC modulus of rupture (typically 600 to 800 psi) = ________________________ psi
PCC E modulus (3 to 8 million psi for sound PCC,
< 3 million for unsound PCC) = ________________________ psi
J load transfer factor (3 2 to 4 0 for JPCP,
JRCP 2 2 to 2 6 for CRCP) = ________________________

TRAFFIC:
Future 18-kip ESALs in design lane over
the design period (Nf) = ________________________

SUPPORT AND DRAINAGE:

Effective dynamic k-value = psi/inch
Effective static k-value = effective dynamic k-value/2
(typically 50 to 500 psi/inch) = psi/inch
Subdrainage coefficient, Cd
(typically 1 0 for poor subdrainage conditions) = ________________________

SERVICEABILITY LOSS:
Design PSI loss (PI — P2) = ________________________

RELIABILITY:
Design reliability, R (80 to 99 percent) = _______________________ _ percent
Overall standard deviation, S0 (typically 0 39) = _______________________

FUTURE STRUCTURAL CAPACITY:

Required slab thickness for future traffic is determined from rigid pavement
design equation or nomograph in Part II, Figure 3 7
Df = ________________________ inches

0 80-0 95: Cracking and spalling exist or punchouts (CRCP) that may be caused pri­
(normally a bonded PCC marily by repeated loading Use condition sur­
overlay is not recommended vey data from Step 3 and the following
under these conditions) guidelines to estimate Ffat for the design lane
(3) Fatigue damage adjustment factor (Ffal) This 0 97-1 00: Few transverse
factor adjusts for past fatigue damage that may cracks/punchouts exist (none
exist in the slab It is determined by observing caused by “ D ” cracking or
the extent of transverse cracking (JPCP, JRCP) reactive aggregate distress)
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-143

JPCP < 5 percent slabs are cracked The designer should recognize that Deff determined
JRCP: < 25 working crack per mile by this method does not reflect any benefit for pre­
CRCP: < 4 punchouts per mile overlay repair The estimate of Deff obtained should
thus be considered a lower limit value The Deff of the
0 94-0 96: A significant number of pavement will be higher if pre-overlay repair of load-
transverse cracks/punchouts associated distress is done
exist (none caused by “ D ” A worksheet for determination of Deff for JPCP,
cracking or reactive aggregate JRCP, and CRCP is provided in Table 5 12
distress)
JPCP: 5-15 percent slabs are cracked
Step 8: Determination o f Overlay Thickness.
JRCP: 25-75 working cracks per mile
CRCP 4-12 punchouts per mile The thickness of bonded PCC overlay is computed
as follows:
0 90-0 93: A large number of transverse
cracks/punchouts exist (none
caused by “ D ” cracking or Dni — Df D,eff
reactive aggregate distress)
JPCP: > 15 percent slabs are cracked
JRCP: > 75 working cracks per mile where
CRCP > 2 punchouts per mile
Dol = Required thickness of bonded PCC
overlay, inches
Df = Slab thickness determined in Step 6,
Detf From Rem aining Life For PCC Pavements inches
Deff = Effective thickness of existing slab
The remaining life of the pavement is given by the determined in Step 7, inches
following equation:
The thickness of overlay determined from the
above relationship should be reasonable when the
Np
RL = 100 1 - overlay is required to correct a structural deficiency
N IS See Section 5 2 17 for discussion of factors which
may result in unreasonable overlay thicknesses
where

RL = remaining life, percent 5.8.6 Shoulders

Np = total traffic to date, ESALs
Nf 5 = total traffic to pavement “ failure,” ESALs See Section 5 2 10 for guidelines

Nj 5 may be estimated using the new pavement

design equations or nomographs in Part II To be
5.8.7 Joints
consistent with the AASHO Road Test and the devel­
opment of these equations, a “ failure” PSI equal to
Existing JPCP and JRCP Transverse and longitu­
1 5 and a reliability of 50 percent is recommended
dinal joints should be saw cut completely through the
Deff is determined from the following equation:
overlay thickness (plus 0 5-inch depth) as soon as cur­
ing allows after overlay placement Failure to saw
Deff = CF * D joints soon after placement may result in debonding
and cracking at the joints No dowels or reinforcing
steel should be placed in these joints An appropriate
where sealant reservoir should be sawed and sealant should
be placed as soon as possible
CF = condition factor determined from Figure Existing CRCP Transverse joints must not be cut in
52 the bonded overlay, as they are not needed Transverse
D = thickness of the existing slab, inches joints are also not needed for the end joints for full-
III-144 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 5.12. Calculation of Deff for Bonded PCC Overlay of JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP

Condition Survey Method:

Fjc Number of unrepaired deteriorated joints/mile = ____________________
Number of unrepaired deteriorated cracks/mile = _____________________
Number of unrepaired punchouts/mile = _____________________
Number of expansion joints, exceptionally wide joints
( > 1 inch) or AC full-depth patches/mile = ___________________ _
Total/mile = ------------------------------

F dur 1 00: No sign of PCC durability problems

0 96-0 99, Some durability cracking exists, but no spalling exists
0 88-0 95 Cracking and spalling exist

Ffat 0 97-1 00 Very few transverse cracks/punchouts exist

0 94-0 96 A significant number of transverse cracking/punchouts exist
0 90-0 93 A large amount of transverse cracking/punchouts exist

Deff ~ Fjc * Fdur * Ffat * D —

Remaining Life Method:

Np = Past design lane ESALs
N r 5 = Design lane ESALs to P2 of 1 5

CF (Figure 5 2)

Deff — CF * D —
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-145

depth reinforced tied concrete patches Longitudinal 5.9.1 Feasibility

joints should be sawed in the same manner as for
JPCP and JRCP An unbonded overlay is a feasible rehabilitation
alternative for PCC pavements for practically all con­
ditions They are most cost-effective when the exist­
ing pavement is badly deteriorated because of reduced
5.8.8 Bonding Procedures and Material need for pre-overlay repair Conditions under which a
PCC unbonded overlay would not be feasible include:
The successful performance of the bonded overlay
depends on a reliable bond with the existing surface (1) The amount of deteriorated slab cracking and
(28) The following guidelines are provided joint spalling is not large and other alternatives
would be much more economical
(1) The existing surface must be cleaned and (2) Vertical clearance at bridges is inadequate for
roughened, through a mechanical process that required overlay thickness This may be ad­
removes a thin layer of concrete, but does not dressed by reconstructing the pavement under
damage (crack) the surface Shot blasting is the the overhead bridges or by raising the bridges
most used system Cold milling has been used, Thicker unbonded overlays may also necessi­
but may cause damage to the surface and thus tate raising signs and guardrails, as well as
requires sand blasting afterward to remove any increasing side slopes and extending culverts
loose particles Sufficient right-of-way must be available or
(2) A bonding agent is recommended to help obtainable to permit these activities
achieve a more reliable bond Water, cement, (3) The existing pavement is susceptible to large
and sand mortar; water and cement slurry, and heaves or settlements
low-viscosity epoxy have been used for this
If construction duration is critical, PCC overlays
purpose Bonded overlays constructed without
may utilize high-early-strength PCC mixes PCC
a bonding agent have performed well in some
overlays have been opened within 6 to 24 hours after
instances
placement using these mixtures

5.9.2 Pre-overlay Repair

5.8.9 Widening

One major advantage of an unbonded overlay is that

See Section 5 2 16 for guidelines
the amount of repairs to the existing pavement are
greatly reduced However, unbonded overlays are not
intended to bridge localized areas of nonuniform sup­
5.9 UNBONDED JPCP, JRCP, AND CRCP port The following types of distress (on the next
OVERLAY OF JPCP, JRCP,CRCP, page) should be repaired prior to placement of the
AND AC/PCC overlay to prevent reflection cracks that may reduce its
service life
An unbonded JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP overlay of an Guidelines on repairs are provided in References 1
existing JPCP, JRCP, CRCP, or composite (AC/PCC) and 3 Other forms of pre-overlay treatment for badly
pavement can be placed to improve both structural deteriorated pavements include slab fracturing (break/
capacity and functional condition An unbonded con­ seat, crack/seat, or rubblizing) the existing PCC slab
crete overlay consists of the following construction prior to placement of the separation layer Fracturing
tasks: and seating the existing slab may provide more uni­
form support for the overlay
(1) Repairing only badly deteriorated areas and
making subdrainage improvements (if needed)
(2) Constructing widening (if needed) 5.9.3 Reflection Crack Control
(3) Placing a separation layer (this layer may also
serve as a leveling course) When an AC separation layer of 1 to 2 inches is
(4) Placing the concrete overlay used, there should be no problem with reflection of
(5) Sawing and sealing the joints cracks through unbonded overlays However, this sep-
111-146 Design of Pavement Structures

Distress Type Overlay Type Repair

Working crack JPCP or JRCP No repair needed
CRCP Full-depth dowelled repair if differential
deflection is significant
Punchout JPCP, JRCP, CRCP Full-depth repair
Spalled joint JPCP or JRCP No repair needed
CRCP Full-depth repair of severely deteriorated joints
Pumping JPCP, JRCP, CRCP Edge drains (if needed)
Settlement JPCP, JRCP, CRCP Level-up with AC
Poor joint/crack JPCP, JRCP, CRCP No repair needed, if pavement has many joints
load transfer or cracks with poor load transfer, consider
a thicker AC separation layer

aration layer thickness may not be adequate for an The required overlay thickness may be determined
unbonded overlay when the existing pavement has through the following design steps These design steps
poor load transfer and high differential deflections provide a comprehensive design approach that recom­
across transverse cracks or joints mends testing the pavement to obtain valid design in­
puts If it is not possible to conduct this testing, an
approximate overlay design may be developed based
5.9.4 Subdrainage upon visible distress observations by skipping Steps 4
and 5, and by estimating other inputs
See Section 5 2 4 for guidelines The overlay design can be done for a uniform sec­
tion or on a point-by-point basis as described in
Section 5 3 1
5.9.5 Thickness Design
Step 1: Existing pavement design.
The required thickness of the unbonded overlay is a (1) Existing slab thickness
function of the structural capacity required to meet (2) Type of load transfer (mechanical devices, ag­
future traffic demands and the structural capacity of gregate interlock, CRCP)
the existing pavement The required overlay thickness (3) Type of shoulder (tied, PCC, other)
to increase structural capacity to carry future traffic is
determined by the following equation Step 2: Traffic analysis.
(1) Past cumulative 18-kip ESALs in the design
D0j = v/Df — D^ff lane (Np), for use in the remaining life method
of Deff determination only
(2) Predicted future 18-kip ESALs in the design
where
lane over the design period (Nf)
D„i = Required thickness of unbonded PCC
Step 3: Condition survey.
overlay, inches
Df = Slab thickness to carry future traffic, The following distresses are measured during the
inches condition survey for JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP Sam­
Deff = Effective thickness of existing slab, pling along the project may be used to estimate these
inches quantities in the most heavily trafficked lane Distress
types and severities are defined in Reference 23 Dete­
Unbonded concrete overlays have been success­ riorated means medium or higher severity
fully constructed as thin as 5 inches and as thick as 12
JPCP/JRCP:
inches or more Thicknesses of seven to 10 inches
have been typical for most highway pavement un­ (1) Number of deteriorated transverse joints per
bonded overlays mile
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-147

(2) Number of deteriorated transverse cracks per pounds are recommended ASTM D 4694 and D 4695
mile provide additional guidance on deflection testing
(3) Number of existing expansion joints, excep­ For each slab tested, backcalculate the effective k-
tionally wide joints (more than 1 inch) or full- value using Figure 5 10 or a backcalculation proce­
depth, full-lane-width AC patches dure The AREA of each deflection basin is computed
(4) Presence and general severity of PCC durabil­ from the following equation
ity problems
(a) “ D ” cracking: low severity (cracks
only), medium severity (some spalling), 636
AREA = 6 * 1 + 2 +
high severity (severe spalling) v + 2 [ a do
(b) Reactive aggregate cracking: low, me­
dium, high severity
where
(5) Evidence of faulting, pumping of fines or
water at joints, cracks and pavement edge
d0 = deflection in center of loading plate, inches
CRCP: dj = deflections at 12, 24, and 36 inches from
plate center, inches
(1) Number of punchouts per mile
(2) Number of deteriorated transverse cracks per AREA will typically range from 29 to 32 for sound
mile concrete
(3) Number of existing expansion joints, excep­
(1) Effective dynamic k-value Enter Figure 5 10
tionally wide joints (> 1 inch) or full-depth,
with d0 and AREA to determine the effective
full-lane-width AC patches
dynamic k-value beneath each slab for a circu­
(4) Number of existing and new repairs prior to
lar load radius of 5 9 inches and magnitude of
overlay per mile
9.000 pounds N ote that for loads within
(5) Presence and general severity of PCC durabil­
2.000 pounds more or less, deflections may be
ity problems (N o te : surface spalling of tight
scaled linearly to 9,000-pound deflections
cracks where the underlying CRCP is sound
If a single overlay thickness is being de­
should not be considered a durability problem) signed for a uniform section, compute the
(a) “ D ” cracking low severity (cracks
mean effective dynamic k-value of the slabs
only), medium severity (some spalling),
tested in the uniform section
high severity (severe spalling) (2) Effective static k-value
(b) Reactive aggregate cracking low, me­
dium, high severity
(6) Evidence of pumping of fines or water Effective static k-value

= Effective dynamic k-value/2

Step 4: Deflection testing
(strongly recommended).
The effective static k-value may need to be ad­
When designing an unbonded overlay for existing
justed for seasonal effects using the approach
JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP, follow the guidelines given
presented in Part II, Section 3 2 1 However,
below for deflection testing and determination of the
the k-value can change substantially and have
effective static k-value When designing an unbonded
only a small effect on overlay thickness
overlay for existing AC/PCC, follow the guidelines
given in Section 5 7, Step 4, for deflection testing and
Step 5: Coring and materials testing.
determination of the effective static k-value
Measure slab deflection basins in the outer wheel When designing an unbonded overlay for existing
path along the project at an interval sufficient to ade­ JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP, coring and materials testing of
quately assess conditions Intervals of 100 to 1,000 the existing PCC slab are not needed for overlay thick­
feet are typical Measure deflections with sensors lo­ ness design When designing an unbonded overlay for
cated at 0, 12, 24, and 36 inches from the center of existing AC/PCC, follow the guidelines given in Sec­
load A heavy-load deflection device (e g , Falling tion 5 7, Step 5, for determination of the AC modulus
Weight Deflectometer) and a load magnitude of 9,000 by coring and materials testing
111-148 Design o f Pavement Structures

Step 6: Determination o f required slab thickness (9) Subdrainage capability o f existing slab, after
fo r fu tu re traffic (Df). subdrainage improvements, if any See Part II,
Table 2 5, as well as Reference 5, for guidance
The elastic modulus, modulus of rupture, and load
in determining Cd Pumping or faulting at
transfer inputs to determine Df for unbonded PCC
joints and cracks determined in Step 3 is evi­
overlays of PCC and AC/PCC pavements are repre­
dence that a subdrainage problem exists In
sentative of the new PCC overlay to be placed rather
selecting this value, note that the poor drainage
than of the existing slab This is emphasized because
situation at the AASHO Road Test would be
it is theproperties of the overlay slab (i e , elastic
given a Cd of 1 0
modulus, modulus of rupture, and load transfer),
which will control the performance of the unbonded Compute Df for the above design inputs using the
overlay rigid pavement design equation or nomograph in Part
II, Figure 3 7 A worksheet for determining Df is pro­
(1) Effective static k-value beneath the existing
vided in Table 5 13
pavement Determine from one of the follow­
ing methods Step 7: Determination o f effective slab thickness
(a) Backcalculate the effective dynamic k-
(Deff ) o f existing pavement.
value from deflection basins as described
in Step 4 Divide the effective dynamic The condition survey and remaining life proce­
k-value by 2 to obtain the effective static dures are presented
k-value The static k-value obtained may
need to be adjusted for seasonal effects
(see Part II, Section 3 2 1) Deff From Condition Survey
(b) Conduct plate load tests (ASTM D 1196)
after slab removal at a few sites This The effective thickness (Deff) of an existing PCC or
alternative is very costly and time-con­ AC/PCC pavement is computed from the following
suming and not often used The static k- equation
value obtained may need to be adjusted
for seasonal effects (see Part II, Section D eff = Fjcu * D
3 2 1)
(c) Estimate from soils data and base type
and thickness, using Figure 3 3 in Part where
II, Section 3 2 This alternative is sim­
D = existing PCC slab thickness, inches
ple, but the static k-value obtained must
(N o te : maximum D for use in unbonded
be recognized as a rough estimate The
concrete overlay design is 10 inches even
static k-value obtained may need to be
if the existing D is greater than 10 inches)
adjusted for seasonal effects (see Part II,
Fjcu = joints and cracks adjustm ent factor for
Section 3 2 1)
unbonded concrete overlays
(2) Design PSI loss PSI immediately after overlay
(PI) minus PSI at time of next rehabilitation
N ote that the existing AC surface is neglected in
(P2)
determining the effective slab thickness of an existing
(3) J, load transfer factor fo r joint design o f the
AC/PCC pavement
unbonded PCC overlay. See Part II, Section
Field surveys of unbonded jointed concrete over­
2 4 2, Table 2 6
lays have shown very little evidence of reflection
(4) PCC modulus o f rupture o f unbonded PCC
cracking or other problems caused by the existing
overlay.
slab Therefore, the Fdur and F fat are not used for un­
(5) Elastic modulus o f unbonded PCC overlay.
bonded concrete overlays The F jCU factor is modified
(6) Loss o f support Use LS = 0 for unbonded
to show a reduced effect of deteriorated cracks and
PCC overlay
joints in the existing slab, and is given in Figure 5 13
(7) Overlay design reliability, R (percent) See
Part I, Section 4 2, Part II, Table 2 2, and Part (1) Joints and cracks adjustmentfactor (Fjcu) This
III, Section 5 2 15 factor adjusts for the extra loss in PSI caused
(8) Overall standard deviation (S„) fo r rigid pave­ by deteriorated reflection cracks or punchouts
ment See Part I, Section 4 3 in the overlay that result from any unrepaired
Rehabilitation with Overlays III-149

Table 5.13. W orksheet for D eterm ination of Df for U nbonded PCC Overlay

SLAB:
Type of load transfer system: mechanical device, aggregate interlock, CRCP
Type of shoulder = tied PCC, other
PCC modulus of rupture of unbonded overlay
(typically 600 to 800 psi) = ________________________ psi
PCC E modulus of unbonded overlay (3 to 5 million psi) = ________________________psi
J load transfer factor of unbonded overlay
(2 5 to 4 4 for jointed PCC, 2 3 to 3.2 for CRCP) = ________________ _

TR A FFIC :
Future 18-kip ESALs in design lane over
the design period (Nf) = ________________________

SUPPORT AND DRAINAGE:

Effective dynamic k-value = _________________________ psi/inch
Effective static k-value = Effective dynamic k-value/2
(typically 50 to 500 psi/inch) = _________________________ psi/inch
Subdrainage coefficient, Cd
(typically 1 0 for poor subdrainage conditions) = ________________________

SERV ICEABILITY LOSS:

Design PSI loss (PI — P2) = ________________________

RELIA BILITY :
Design reliability, R (80 to 99 percent) = _________________________ percent
Overall standard deviation, SD (typically 0.39) = ________________________

FU TU R E STRUCTURAL CAPACITY:
Required slab thickness for future traffic is determined from rigid pavement
design equation or nomograph in Part II, Figure 3 7
Df = ________________________ inches

deteriorated joints, cracks and other dis­ Number of unrepaired deteriorated joints/
continuities in the existing slab prior to mile
overlay Very little such loss in PSI has Number of unrepaired deteriorated cracks/
been observed for JPCP or JRCP unbonded mile
Number of expansion joints, exceptionally
overlays
wide joints (greater than 1 inch) or full-
The following information is needed to de­
depth, full-lane-width AC patches/mile
termine F jCU to adjust overlay thickness for the
extra loss in PSI from deteriorated reflection The total number of unrepaired deteriorated
cracks that are not repaired: joints/cracks and other discontinuities per mile
111-150 Design o f Pavement Structures

O
O

rH
•H
o g
CO R

m
o

JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP Overlays

2 o
cd
H
U
o
2 *0
C
td

o 01
CN Jj

■H
0

F jCU Adjustment Factor for Unbonded

o h>
o
0
m

03
a
(d
o M
•° EH

TJ
0 Figure 5.13.

U
0
*H

■P
0
Q
m o m o m o in o m o m o
1 .0 0

o o 00 00 t* . r>. o •o in in ■sT
d o o d d o d o d o o d
Rehabilitation with Overlays III-151

prior to overlay is used to determine the F jCU A worksheet for determination of Detf is provided
from Figure 5 13 for the appropriate type of in Table 5 14
PCC overlay As an alternative to extensive
full-depth repair for an unbonded overlay to be Step 8: Determination o f Overlay Thickness.
placed on a badly deteriorated pavement, a
thicker AC interlayer should eliminate any re­ The thickness of unbonded PCC overlay is com­
flection cracking problem, so that Fjcu = 1 0 puted as follows

D 0i = V D ? - D;|2
eff
Deff From Remaining Life For PCC Pavements

The remaining life of the pavement is given by the where

following equation:
Dol = Required thickness of unbonded PCC
Np overlay, inches
RL = 100 1 -
Df = Slab thickness determined in Step 6,
N 1:
inches
Deff = Effective thickness of existing slab
where determined in Step 7, inches

RL = remaining life, percent The thickness of overlay determined from the

Np = total traffic to date, ESALs above relationship should be reasonable when the
N1 5 total traffic to pavement “ failure,” ESALs overlay is required to correct a structural deficiency
See Section 5 2 17 for discussion of factors which
N! 5 may be estimated using the new pavement de­ may result in unreasonable overlay thicknesses
sign equations or nomographs in Part II To be con­
sistent with the AASHO Road Test and the
development of these equations, a “ failure” PSI equal
to 1 5 and a reliability of 50 percent are recom­ 5.9.6 Shoulders
mended
Deff is determined from the following equation See Section 5 2 10 for guidelines

Deff — CF * D
5.9.7 Joints
where
Transverse and longitudinal joints must be pro­
CF = condition factor determined from Figure vided in the same manner as for new pavement con­
52 struction, except for the following joint spacing
D = thickness of the existing slab, inches guidelines for JPCP overlays Due to the unusually
(N o t e : m axim um D for use in unbonded stiff support beneath the slab, it is advisable to limit
concrete overlay design is 10 inches even joint spacing to the following to control thermal gradi­
if the existing D is greater than 10 inches) ent curling stress:

The designer should recognize that Deff determined

Maximum joint spacing (feet)
by this method does not reflect any benefit for pre­
overlay repair The estimate of Deff obtained should = 1 75 * Slab thickness (inches)
thus be considered a lower limit value The Deff of the
pavement will be higher if preoverlay repair of load-
associated distress is done It is also emphasized that Example: slab thickness = 8 inches
this method of determining Deff is not applicable to
AC/PCC pavements joint spacing = 8 * 1 75 = 14 feet
152 Design of Pavement Structures

Table 5.14. Calculation of Deff for Unbonded PCC Overlay of JPCP, JRCP, CRCP, and AC/PCC

Condition Survey Method:

JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP Overlay:
F jCU Number of unrepaired deteriorated joints/mile = ________________________
Number of unrepaired deteriorated cracks/mile = _________________________
Number of unrepaired deteriorated punchouts/mile = _________________________
Number of expansion joints, exceptionally wide joints
( > 1 inch) or full-depth, full-lane-width AC patches/mile = ________________________
Total/mile = ____________________ ____
FJCU (Figure 5 13)

Effective Slab Thickness:

Deff — Fjcu * D —

N otes M axim um D allowed is 10 inches for use in calculating Deff for unbonded overlays
Existing AC surface is neglected in calculating Deff for existing AC/PCC pavement
when designing an unbonded PCC overlay

Remaining Life Method:

Np = Past design lane ESALs
N! 5 = Design lane ESALs to P2 of 1 5

CF

Deff = CF * D =

N ote Maximum D allowed is 10 inches for use in calculating Deff for unbonded
overlays
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-153

5.9.8 Reinforcement (4) Placing an AC leveling course (if needed)

(5) Placing the concrete overlay
Unbonded JRCP and CRCP overlays must contain (6) Sawing and sealing the joints
reinforcement to hold cracks tightly together The de­
sign of the reinforcement would follow the guidelines
given for new pavement construction, except that the 5.10.1 Feasibility
friction factor would be high (e g , 2 to 4) due to
bonding between the AC separation layer and the new A PCC overlay is a feasible rehabilitation alterna­
PCC overlay (see Part II, Section 3 4) tive for AC pavements for practically all conditions
They are most cost-effective when the existing pave­
ment is badly deteriorated Conditions under which a
5.9.9 Separation Interlayer PCC overlay would not be feasible include

A separation interlayer is needed between the un­ (1) The amount of deterioration is not large and
bonded PCC overlay and the existing slab to isolate other alternatives would be much more eco­
the overlay from the cracks and other deterioration in nomical
the existing slab. The most common and successfully (2) Vertical clearance at bridges is inadequate for
used separation interlayer material is an AC mixture required overlay thickness This may be ad­
placed one inch thick If a level-up is needed the AC dressed by reconstructing the pavement under
interlayer may also be used for that purpose (29, 30) the overhead bridges or by raising the bridges
Some thin materials that have been used as Thicker PCC overlays may also necessitate
bondbreakers have not performed well Other thin lay­ raising signs and guardrails, as well as in­
ers have been used successfully, including surface creasing side slopes and extending culverts
treatments, slurry seals, and asphalt with sand cover Sufficient right-of-way must be available or
for existing pavements without a large amount of fault­ obtainable to permit these activities
ing or slab breakup For heavily trafficked highways, (3) The existing pavement is susceptible to large
the potential problem of erosion of the interlayer must heaves or settlements
be considered A thin surface treatment may erode If construction duration is critical, PCC overlays
faster than an AC material There is no reason that a may utilize high-early-strength PCC mixes PCC
permeable open-graded interlayer cannot be used, overlays have been opened within 6 to 24 hours after
provided a drainage system is designed to collect the placement using these mixtures
water from this layer This type of interlayer would
provide excellent reflective crack control as well as
preventing pumping and erosion of the interlayer 5.10.2 Pre-overlay Repair

One major advantage of a JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP

5.9.10 Widening overlay over AC pavement is that the amount of repair
required for the existing pavement is greatly reduced
See Section 5 2 16 for guidelines However, the following types of distress (on the next
page) should be repaired prior to placement of the
overlay to prevent reflection cracks that may reduce its
5.10 JPCP, JRCP, AND CRCP OVERLAY service life Guidelines on repairs are provided in Ref­
OF AC PAVEMENT erences 1 and 3

JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP overlays of AC pavement

can be placed to improve both structural capacity and 5.10.3 Reflection Crack Control
functional conditions This type of overlay consists of
the following major construction tasks:
Reflection cracking is generally not a problem for
(1) Repairing deteriorated areas and making sub­ JPCP, JRCP, or CRCP overlays of AC pavement
drainage improvements (if needed) However, if the existing AC pavement has severe
(2) Constructing widening (if needed) transverse thermal cracks, it may be desirable to place
(3) Milling the existing surface if major distortion some type of separation layer over the transverse
or inadequate cross-slope exists cracks to reduce the potential for reflection cracking
111-154 Design o f Pavement Structures

Distress Type Overlay Type R epair Type

Alligator cracking JPCP or JRCP No repair needed
CRCP Patch areas with high deflections
Transverse cracks JPCP, JRCP, CRCP No repair needed
Pumping, stripping JPCP, JRCP, CRCP Edge drains (if needed)
Remove stripping layer if severe
Settlement/heave JPCP, JRCP, CRCP Level-up with AC

5.10.4 Subdrainage Step 2: Traffic analysis.

(1) Predicted future 18-kip ESALs in the design
See Section 5 2 4 for guidelines
lane over the design period (Nf)

Step 3: Condition survey.

5.10.5 Thickness Design
A detailed survey of distress conditions is not re­
quired Only a general survey that identifies any of the
The required thickness of the PCC overlay is a
following distresses that may affect the performance
function of the structural capacity required to meet
of a PCC overlay is needed:
future traffic demands and the support provided by the
underlying AC pavement The required overlay thick­ (1) Heaves and swells
ness to increase structural capacity to carry future (2) Signs of stripping of the AC This could be­
traffic is determined by the following equation come even more serious under a PCC overlay
(3) Large transverse cracks that, without a new
separation layer, may reflect through the PCC
D 0i = D f overlay

where Step 4: Deflection testing

(strongly recommended).
Dol = Required thickness of PCC overlay, inches Measure deflection basins in the outer wheel path
Df = Slab thickness to carry future traffic, along the project at an interval sufficient to adequately
inches assess conditions Intervals of 100 to 1,000 feet are
typical A heavy-load deflection device (e g , Falling
PCC overlays of AC pavement have been success­ Weight Deflectometer) and a load magnitude of 9,000
fully constructed as thin as 5 inches and as thick as 12 pounds are recommended ASTM D 4694 and D 4695
inches or more Seven to 10 inches has been typical provide additional guidance on deflection testing De­
for most highway pavement overlays flections should be measured at the center of the load
The required overlay thickness may be determined and at least one other distance from the load, as de­
through the following design steps These design steps scribed in Section 5 4 5, Step 4
provide a comprehensive design approach that recom­ For each point tested, backcalculate the subgrade
mends testing the pavement to obtain valid design in­ modulus (Mr ) and the effective pavement modulus
puts If it is not possible to conduct this testing, an (Ep) according to the procedures described in Section
approximate overlay design may be developed based 5 4 for AC pavements
upon visible distress observations by skipping Steps 4
and 5, and by estimating other inputs (1) Effective dynamic k-value Estimate the effec­
The overlay design can be done for a uniform sec­ tive dynamic k-value from Figure 3 3 in Part
tion or on a point-by-point basis as described in Sec­ II, Section 3 2, using the backcalculated sub­
tion 5 3 1 grade resilient modulus (MR), the effective
modulus of the pavement layers above the sub­
grade (Ep), and the total thickness of the pave­
Step 1: Existing pavement design.
ment layers above the subgrade (D) It is
(1) Existing material types and layer thicknesses emphasized that the backcalculated subgrade
Rehabilitation with Overlays 111-155

resilient modulus value used to estimate the See Part II, Table 2 5, as well as Reference 5,
effective dynamic k-value should not be ad­ for guidance in determining Cd In selecting
justed by the C factor (e g , 0 33) which per­ this value, note that the poor drainage situation
tains to establishing the design MR for AC at the AASHO Road Test would be given a Cd
overlays of AC pavements of 1 0
If a single overlay thickness is being de­
signed for a uniform section, compute the Compute Df for the above design inputs using the
mean effective dynamic k-value of the uniform rigid pavement design equation or nomograph in Part
section II, Figure 3 7 When designing an overlay thickness
for a uniform pavement section, mean input values
Step 5: Coring and materials testing. must be used When designing an overlay thickness
for specific points along the project, the data for that
Unless some unusual distress condition exists, cor­
point must be used A worksheet for determining Df is
ing and materials testing are not required
provided in Table 5 15
Step 6: Determination o f required slab thickness
fo r future traffic (Df). Step 7: Determination o f Overlay Thickness.

(1) Effective static k-value (at bottom o f PCC The PCC overlay thickness is computed as follows
overlay over an existing AC pavement) Deter­
mine from one of the following methods
(a) Determine the effective dynamic k-value Doi = Df
from the backcalculated subgrade modu­
lus Mr , pavement modulus Ep, and pave­
ment thickness D as described in Step 4 The thickness of overlay determined from the
Divide the effective dynamic k-value by above relationship should be reasonable when the
2 to obtain the static k-value The static overlay is required to correct a structural deficiency
k-value may need to be adjusted for sea­ See Section 5 2 17 for discussion of factors which
sonal effects (see Part II, Section 3 2 1) may result in unreasonable overlay thicknesses
(b) Estimate from soils data and pavement
layer types and thicknesses, using Figure
3 3 in Part II, Section 3 2 The static k-
value obtained may need to be adjusted 5.10.6 Shoulders
for seasonal effects (see Part II, Section
3 2 1) See Section 5 2 10 for guidelines
(2) Design PSI loss PSI immediately after overlay
(PI) minus PSI at time of next rehabilitation
(P2)
(3) J, load transfer factor fo r joint design o f the
5.10.7 Joints
PCC overlay. See Part II, Section 2 4 2, Table
26
See Section 5 8 7 for guidelines
(4) Modulus o f rupture o f PCC overlay. Use mean
28-day, third-point-loading modulus of rupture
of the overlay PCC
(5) Elastic modulus o f PCC overlay. Use mean 28-
day modulus of elasticity of overlay PCC 5.10.8 Reinforcement
(6) Loss o f support See Part II
(7) Overlay design reliability, R (percent) See See Section 5 8 8 for guidelines
Part I, Section 4 2, Part II, Table 2 2, and Part
III, Section 5 2 15
(8) Overall standard deviation (S„) fo r rigid pave­
ment See Part I, Section 4 3 5.10.10 Widening
(9) Subdrainage capability o f existing AC pave­
ment, after subdrainage improvements, if any See Section 5 2 16 for guidelines
HI-156 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 5.15. W orksheet for D eterm ination of Df for PCC Overlay of AC Pavement

SLAB:
Type of load transfer system: mechanical device, aggregate interlock, CRCP
Type of shoulder = tied PCC, other
PCC modulus of rupture of unbonded overlay
(typically 600 to 800 psi) = ___________ psi
PCC E modulus of unbonded overlay (3 to 5 million psi) = ___________ psi
J load transfer factor of unbonded overlay
(2 5 to 4 4 for jointed PCC, 2 3 to 3 2 for CRCP) = _________________________

TRAFFIC:
Future 18-kip ESALs in design lane over
the design period (Nf) = --------------------- ----------------

SUPPORT AND DRAINAGE:

Effective dynamic k-value = -------------------------------------- psi/inch
Effective static k-value = Effective dynamic k-value/2
(typically 50 to 500 psi/inch) = _________________________ psi/inch
Subdrainage coefficient, Cd
(typically 1 0 for poor subdrainage conditions) = ________________________

SERVICEABILITY LOSS:
Design PSI loss (PI - P2)

RELIABILITY:
Design reliability, R (80 to 99 percent) percent
Overall standard deviation, S0 (typically 0 39)

FUTURE STRUCTURAL CAPACITY:

Required slab thickness for future traffic is determined from rigid pavement
design equation or nomograph in Part II, Figure 3 7
D, inches
 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 5

1 Federal Highway Administration, “ Pavement 10 Halstead, W J , “ Criteria For Use of Asphalt

Rehabilitation Manual,” Pavement Division, Friction Surfaces,” NCHRP Synthesis No
Office of Highway Operations, Washington, 104, Transportation Research Board, 1983
D C (current edition) 11 Thompson, M R and Robnett, Q L , “ Resil­
2 Darter, M I , Barenberg, E J , and Yrjanson, ient Properties of Subgrade Soils,” Final
W A , “Joint Repair Methods For Portland Ce­ Report—Data Summary, Transportation Engi­
ment Concrete Pavements,” NCHRP Report neering Series No 14, Illinois Cooperative
No 281, Transportation Research Board, 1985 Highway Research and Transportation Pro­
3 “ Techniques for Pavement Rehabilitation,” gram Series No 160, University of Illinois at
Training Course Participants Notes, National Urbana-Champaign, 1976
Highway Institute, Federal Highway Adminis- 12 Taylor, M L , “ Characterization of Flexible
tration, 3d Edition, 1987 Pavements by Nondestructive Testing,” Ph D
4 Snyder, M B , Reiter, M J , Hall, K T , and thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Cham-
Darter, M I , “ Rehabilitation of Concrete paign, 1979
Pavements, Volume I—Repair Rehabilitation 13 Carpenter, S H , “ Layer Coefficients for Flex­
Techniques,” Report No FHWA-RD-88-071, ible Pavements,” ERES Consultants, Inc , re­
Federal Highway Administration, 1989 port for Wisconsin DOT, August 1990
5 Smith, K D , Peshkin, D G , Darter, M I , 14 Figueroa, J L , “ Resilient-Based Flexible
Mueller, A L , and Carpenter, S H , “ Per­ Pavement Design Procedure for Secondary
formance of Jointed Concrete Pavements, Roads,” Ph D thesis, University of Illinois at
Phase I, Volume 5, Data Collection and Analy­ Urbana-Champaign, 1979
sis Procedures,” Federal Highway Administra- 15 Raad, L and Figueroa, J L , “ Load Response
tion Report No FHWA/RD/89/140, March of Transportation Support Systems,” Transpor­
1990 tation Engineering Journal, American Society
6 Finn, F N , and Monismith, C L , “Asphalt of Civil Engineers, Volume 106, No TE1,
Overlay Design Procedures,” NCHRP Synthe­ 1980
sis No 116, Transportation Research Board, 16 Pavement Consultancy Services/Law Engi­
1984 neering, “ Guidelines and Methodologies for
7 Vespa, J W , Hall, K T , Darter, M I , and the Rehabilitation of Rigid Highway Pavements
Hall, J P , “ Performance of Resurfacing of Using Asphalt Concrete Overlays,” for Na­
JRCP and CRCP on the Illinois Interstate tional Asphalt Paving Association, June 1991
Highway System,” Illinois Highway Research 17 Pavement Consultancy Services/Law Engi­
Report No 517-5, Federal Highway Ad­ neering, “ FWD Analysis of PA 1-81 Rubbliza-
ministration Report No FHWA-IL-UI-229, tion Project,” for Pennsylvania Department of
1990 Transportation, February 1992
8 Darter, M I , Elliott, R P , and Hall, K T , 18 Hall, K T , “ Performance, Evaluation, and
“ Revision of AASHTO Pavement Overlay De­ Rehabilitation of Asphalt Overlaid Concrete
sign Procedures, Appendix Overlay Design Pavements,” Ph D thesis, University of Illi­
Examples,” NCHRP Project 20-7/Task 39, nois at Urbana-Champaign, 1991
Final Report, April 1992 19 Schutzbach, A M , “ Crack and Seat Method
9 Darter, M I , Elliott, R P , and Hall, K T , of Pavement Rehabilitation,” Transportation
“ Revision of AASHTO Pavement Overlay De­ Research Record No 1215, 1989
sign Procedures, Appendix Documentation of 20 Kilareski, W P and Bionda, R A , “ Perform­
Design Procedures,” NCHRP Project 20-7/ ance/Rehabilitation of Rigid Pavements, Phase
Task 39, April 1992 II, Volume 2—Crack and Seat and AC Overlay

111-157
111-158 Design o f Pavement Structures

of Rigid Pavements,” Federal Highway Admin­ Manual (MS-1) Ninth Edition,” Research Re­
istration Report No FHWA-RD-89-143, 1989 port 82-2, 1982
21 Ahlrich, R C , “ Performance and Structural 27 Hoffman, M S and Thompson, M R ,
Evaluation of Cracked and Seated Concrete,” “ Mechanistic Interpretation of Nondestructive
Transportation Research Record No 1215, Pavement Testing Deflections,” Transportation
1989 Engineering Series No 32, Illinois Coopera­
22 Thompson, M R , “ Breaking/Cracking and tive Highway and Transportation Research
Seating Concrete Pavements,” NCHRP Syn­ Series No 190, University of Illinois at Ur-
thesis No 144, 1989 bana-Champaign, 1981
23 Smith, K D , Darter, M I , Rauhut, J B , and 28 Peshkin, D G , Mueller, A L , Smith, K D ,
Hall, K T , “ Distress Identification Manual and Darter, M I , “ Structural Overlay Strate­
for the Long-Term Pavement Performance gies for Jointed Concrete Pavements, Vol 3:
(LTPP) Studies,” Strategic Highway Research Performance Evaluation and Analysis of Thin
Program, 1988 Bonded Concrete Overlays,” Report No
24 Southgate, H F , “An Evaluation of Tempera­ FHWA-RD-89-144, Federal Highway Admin­
ture Distribution Within Asphalt Pavements istration, 1990
and its Relationship to Pavement Deflection,” 29 Hutchinson, R L , “ Resurfacing With Port­
Kentucky Department of Highways, Research land Cement Concrete,” NCHRP Synthesis
Report KYHPR-64-20, 1968 No 99, Transportation Research Board, 1982
25 Shell International Petroleum Company, 30 Voigt, G F , Carpenter, S H , and Darter,
“ Pavement Design Manual,” London, En­ M I , “ Rehabilitation of Concrete Pavements,
gland, 1978 Volume II—Overlay Rehabilitation Tech­
26 Asphalt Institute, “ Research and Development niques,” Report No FHWA-RD-88-072, Fed­
of the Asphalt Institute’s Thickness Design eral Highway Administration, 1989
 PART IV
MECHANISTIC-EMPIRICAL
DESIGN PROCEDURES
 PART IV
MECHANISTIC-EMPIRICAL DESIGN
PROCEDURES

1.1 INTROD UCTION searchers recognize that pavement performance will

likely be influenced by a number of factors which will
Part IV of the Guide is a brief overview of the use not be precisely modeled by mechanistic methods It
of analytical and mechanistic procedures for the de­ is, therefore, necessary to calibrate the models with
sign and evaluation of pavement structures observations of performance, i e , empirical correla­
The use of analytical methods to estimate the tions Thus, the procedure is referred to in the Guide
stress, strain, or deflection state of pavements is not as a mechanistic-empirical design procedure
new For portland cement concrete pavements, the use Researchers in this field have hypothesized that
of such methods for design dates back to at least 1938 modeling the pavement, as described above, should
when Bradbury (1) published his paper on design of improve the reliability of the design equations which
reinforced concrete pavements Friberg (2), New- are, in effect, prediction models For example, in Part
mark (3), Pickett (4 ), and Ray (5) were among the II of the Guide, the design nomographs estimate the
early contributors in this field through the 1940’s and thickness of the pavement structure required to main­
1950’s Since that time there have been extensive con­ tain an acceptable level of service for a specific num­
tributions by many investigators from government, ber of traffic loadings In a similar way, mechanistic
industry, and academia For asphalt concrete pave­ procedures would predict the occurrence of distress or
ments, the publications of Burmister (6), McLeod pavement deterioration as a function of traffic and
(7), Acum and Fox (S), and Palmer (9), beginning in environment or environment alone
1940, have provided some of the basic theories appli­ A state of the knowledge summary of mechanistic
cable to this type of pavement design procedures has been prepared as a working
For purposes of this Guide, the use of analytical document and can be found in Volume 3 of the Guide
methods refers to the numerical capability to calculate Volume 3 contains nine chapters and an appendix
the stress, strain, or deflection in a multi-layered sys­ which describe in detail the current status of the devel­
tem, such as a pavement, when subjected to external opment and use of these procedures for design of new
loads, or the effects of temperature or moisture and rehabilitated pavements
Mechanistic methods or procedures will refer to the Most current methods of design for flexible pave­
ability to translate the analytical calculations of pave­ ments make no direct use of mechanistic-design
ment response to performance Performance, for the procedures There are a few exceptions, for example,
majority of procedures used, refers to physical dis­ The Kentucky Department of Transportation (JO),
tress such as cracking or rutting For rigid pavements, The Asphalt Institute (11), and Shell International
the procedures have been applied to determination of (12) all have developed such procedures for general
dowel sizes, reinforcement requirements, and joint application to a variety of design considerations
spacing For flexible pavements, the mechanistic Most methods for structural design of rigid pave­
procedures have also been applied to roughness ments do not include mechanistic design concepts
predictions The method of the Portland Cement Association for
Mechanistic design procedures are based on the fatigue cracking of PCCP is a representative example
assumption that a pavement can be modeled as a (13)
multi-layered elastic or visco-elastic structure on an The design methodology incorporated in the 1972
elastic or visco-elastic foundation Assuming that issue of the AASHTO Design Guide for flexible pave­
pavements can be modeled in this manner, it is possi­ ments did not incorporate mechanistic procedures,
ble to calculate the stress, strain, or deflection (due to although the supporting work, included in NCHRP
traffic loadings and/or environments) at any point Report 128 (14), did introduce such concepts for pos­
within or below the pavement structure However, re­ sible future use in the Guide This issue (1986) of the

IV-3
IV-4 Design o f Pavement Structures

Guide has indirectly used mechanistic procedures for A subset of benefits which could result from the
evaluating seasonal damage and to establish coeffi­ development of mechanistic procedures are summa­
cients for drainage and load transfer Also, the use of rized as follows
the resilient modulus to represent material properties
(1) Estimates of the consequences of new loading
introduces the concept that paving materials can be
conditions can be evaluated For example, the
represented by a quasi-elastic modulus
damaging effects of increased loads, high tire
In summary, while mechanistic-empirical design
pressures, multiple axles, etc , can be modeled
procedures are still somewhat limited for use with
using mechanistic procedures
flexible pavements, there is a significant body of re­
(2) Better utilization of available materials can be
search to draw from if an agency is interested in devel­
estimated For example, the use of stabilized
oping such design procedures For rigid pavements
materials in both rigid and flexible pavements
the use of analytical methods and mechanistic proce­
can be simulated to predict future perform­
dures has been the standard of the industry for over
ance
40 years
(3) Improved procedures to evaluate premature
distress can be developed or conversely to ana­
lyze why some pavements exceed their design
expectations In effect, better diagnostic tech­
1.2 BENEFITS
niques can be developed
(4) Aging can be included in estimates of perform­
Researchers in working to develop mechanistic-
ance, e g , asphalts harden with time which, in
empirical design procedures hypothesize that these
turn, affects both fatigue cracking and rutting
methods, which are based on long-established theory,
(5) Seasonal effects such as thaw-weakening can
will model a pavement more correctly than the empiri­
be included in estimates of performance
cal equations which have been traditionally used for
(6) Consequences of subbase erosion under rigid
flexible pavements and for some aspects of rigid pave­
pavements can be evaluated
ments The primary benefits which could accrue from
(7) Methods can be developed to better evaluate
the successful application of mechanistic procedures
the long-term benefits of providing improved
will be: (1) improved reliability for design, (2) ability
drainage in the roadway section
to predict specific types of distress, and (3) the ability
to extrapolate from limited field and laboratory In summary, while the application of mechanistic-
results empirical design procedures have had only limited
The ability or lack of ability to design a pavement application for flexible pavements, there is a consen­
for site-specific conditions influences the amount of sus among most researchers that such methods offer
conservatism to be included in design The conse­ the best opportunity to improve pavement technology
quences of increased conservatism will result in less for this type of construction for the next several dec­
than optimum use of funds For example, the more ades The application of analytical and mechanistic
conservatism built into each project limits the number procedures are now used for the design of rigid pave­
of projects that can be constructed in any given time ments and have proven to be effective The extension
period Thus, more reliable design methods would of these techniques to new designs and different appli­
result in optimum use of available funds cations is considered to be a viable objective in the
A second major benefit of mechanistic procedures years to come
is the ability to predict specific types of distress, e g ,
cracking, faulting, rutting, etc Pavement management
systems require the ability to predict the occurrence of 1.3 FRAMEWORK FOR DEVELOPMENT
distress in order to minimize the costs of maintenance AND APPLICATION
and rehabilitation Mechanistic procedures offer the
best opportunity to meet this requirement for PMS Figure 1 1 illustrates the framework for the devel­
The third major benefit would be the ability to ex­ opment of mechanistic-empirical design procedures
trapolate from limited amounts of field or laboratory for new designs and for rehabilitation Figure 1 2 il­
data before attempting full-scale, long-term demon­ lustrates the application to an overlay for flexible
stration projects This screening process could save pavements
money and time by eliminating those concepts which The inputs required for the system include traffic,
are judged to have very little merit roadbed soil properties, environment, material char-
Mechanistic-Empirical Design Procedures IV-5
In itia l O esign
D e v e lo p m e n t M e th o d o lo g y

U n c e rta in ty
A g in g |
d
P ave m e nt
S u b g ra d e
T ra ffic M a te ria l
P ro pe rtie s
C h a ra cte ristics

C o n s tru c tio n
T rial P a ve m e nt R e q u ire m e n ts
T h ickn esse s

S tru c tu ra l
A n a ly s is

1 (N o te : S tress S tra in o r D e fo rm a tio n A n a ly s is l

D istress
A n a lysis

F atigue Th erm a l Frost R eflec V o lu m e

R u ttin g tio n F a ulting Punchout R oug h ne ss C hange O the rs
C ra ck in g C ra ckin g E ffe cts C rackin g E ffe cts

L im itin g C a lib ra ted

R e lia b ility
V a lu e s o f D istress D istress P re d ictio n s
(S a fe ty F a cto r)

L ife Cycle
P re d ictio n o

L ife ('y c le E co n o m ic A n a lysis

Co sts In itia l Cost
M a in te n a n c e Cost
User Cost
S alvage V alue
D is c o u n t Ratr

R e h a b ilita tio n M e th o d o lo g y

Figure 1.1. Exam ple A pproach for the Development of a M echanistic-Em pirical Design Model
jy_6 Design of Pavement Structures

CO N D IT IO N NO N D E STR U C TIV E TE STIN G

S U R V EYS (DEFLEC TIO N , C U R V A TU R E ETC )

A N A L Y S IS
SECTIO N S

S A M P LIN G
TESTIN G
AD JU S T
M A TE R IA L M A TE R IA LS
PROPERTIES CH A R A C TE R IZA TIO N

C O M PUTE
• DEFLECTIONS
• C U R V A TU R E
• ETC

NO T ACCEPTABLE

CO M PUTE
D ISTRES S
D E TE R M IN A N T S

Figure 1.2. Overlay Design Procedure Using Elastic Layered Theory to Represent Pavement Response
Mechanistic-Empirical Design Procedures IV-7

acteristics and uncertainty, i e , variance on each of (1) Condition surveys and nondestructive testing
the inputs Aging of materials and construction re­ (deflections, curvature, e tc ) information is
quirements can be included in material characteris­ collected in order to identify analysis sections
tics (2) Sampling and testing of in-place material is
The process requires the selection of a series of completed on a limited basis in order to adjust
trial pavement sections, either rigid or flexible, which material properties to field conditions
are considered to include a range of thicknesses and (3) Seasonal variations of material properties and
materials appropriate to the design problem A struc­ traffic are determined in order to calculate dis­
tural (analytical) analysis is made for each trial sec­ tress The information used in this step would
tion to calculate the stress, strain, and deflection at come from research and development as repre­
specific locations depending on distress criteria sented in Figure 1 1
A working hypothesis or distress criteria must be (4) The two types of distress used for design of the
developed for each of the distress types to be predicted asphalt overlay are rutting and fatigue crack­
by the procedure For example, for fatigue cracking ing For example, if the original pavement had
the distress criteria for rigid pavements is based on the been portland cement concrete, the criteria
maximum tensile stress in the slab and for flexible used might be reflection cracking and rutting
pavements is based on the maximum tensile strain in (5) Based on the distress analysis, a determination
the asphalt concrete Similar criteria have been is made as to the need for a structural overlay;
developed for each of the distress types shown on if none is required, the worn-out pavement will
Figure 1 1, i e , fatigue cracking, rutting, faulting, be renewed by recycling, milling, or a thin
punchouts The “ others” refer to future developments overlay at minimum cost If an overlay is
which can or will be developed required, trial sections will be analyzed which
Since Figure 1 1 represents the development produce plots of traffic versus thickness re­
framework, it is necessary to calibrate the distress quirements needed to satisfy specific perform­
models to field observations This step will provide ance requirements, e g , rutting not to exceed
information regarding the relationship of the pave­ 0 5 inches and cracking, not more than 25
ment response to various levels and amounts of dis­ percent
tress From these correlations, it has been possible to
In summary, Figure 1 1 provides a set of guide­
establish mechanistic-empirical relationships for
lines, a framework, for developing mechanistic design
estimating the type and amount of deterioration as a
procedures Other more detailed procedures may be
function of the input variables
used; however, the general requirements will be the
Based on life-cycle predictions, it is possible to
same Figure 1 2 illustrates the application of these
calculate life-cycle costs according to procedures de­
guidelines to a specific case, i e , overlay of flexible
scribed in Part I, Chapter 3, of this Guide The frame­
pavement It is emphasized that these procedures
work requires that several trial analyses be completed
and applications are not new The technical litera­
in order to be able to interpolate for specific design
ture; American Society of Civil Engineers, Transpor­
conditions and to select a best solution based on
tation Research Board, American Concrete Institute,
performance and cost American Society for Testing and Materials, the As­
A similar procedure is illustrated for rehabilitation sociation of Asphalt Paving Technologists, as well as
In this case, the method would require trial designs various international conferences, all have a wealth
appropriate for rehabilitation as a starting point How­ of background information pertinent to mecha­
ever, as with new construction, the inputs would nistic-empirical design developments The technical
include traffic, roadbed soil properties, construction information is available; however, field trials are
requirements, etc limited
Figure 1 1 represents the general framework which
has been used by most researchers to develop mecha­
nistic design procedures and which could be applied
by user agencies (state highway departments) as a 1.4 IM PLEM ENTATION
guide for in-house development
In Figure 1 2, the general methodology proposed The implementation of a mechanistic pavement
by some investigators (15) for overlays is outlined design procedure requires that consideration be given
The method is summarized briefly as follows: to the following items:
IV-8 Design o f Pavement Structures

(1) determination of types of design 1.4.1 Design Considerations

considerations, i e , cracking, roughness, etc ,
(2) development of a plan to obtain input Mechanistic design procedures can be applied to a
information, i e , moduli, wide variety of pavement performance conditions as
(3) equipment acquisition, described in Section 1 3 The dominant types of dis­
(4) computer hardware and software, tress which can be predicted by mechanistic design
(5) training personnel, procedures relate to physical conditions caused by
(6) development and calibration of prediction traffic loadings or environment Only one mechanistic
models, and design procedure relates directly to the prediction of
(7) testing ride quality, e g , present serviceability index (PSI)
The VESYS program developed for FHWA has in­
The implementation of the mechanistic procedures cluded this capability but requires careful calibration
could take several forms For ride quality, other agencies have developed empir­
(1) The procedures could be used to develop ical methods using calculations of stress, strain, or
design curves similar to those developed by deformation as independent variables for correlating
The Asphalt Institute, Shell International, or with field observations
the Kentucky Department of Transportation Thus, design considerations are best suited to phys­
In this form, the analyst will presolve a larger ical distress Only those distress types which control
number of problems sufficient to develop de­ performance or trigger some kind of maintenance or
sign curves The user is not required to do any rehabilitation need be considered For example, for
analytical work in order to prepare design asphalt concrete-surfaced pavements, fatigue crack­
recommendations A relatively simple step-by- ing, rutting, and possibly low temperature cracking
step procedure can be specified for design would be likely candidates If one or more of these is
which is very similar to procedures in Parts II not a problem for the developing agency, it can be
and III of the Guide eliminated For rigid pavements, fatigue cracking,
(2) The procedures could be used in site-specific faulting, and pumping would be considered
cases to predict performance when conditions A well-thought-out experiment design should be
exceed normal design criteria, e g , excessive prepared in obtaining input information For example,
loads on standard vehicles or any load on non­ it will be desirable to develop regression equations to
standard vehicles predict modulus relationships for soils and paving ma­
(3) The procedures could be used to answer “ what terials A well-planned experiment to include material
i f ” questions, e g , what would be the effect of index values and in-place conditions will reduce the
increasing the legal axle load on performance amount of testing required for routine design Similar
or what would be the effect of increased tire experiment designs for collecting pertinent tempera­
pressure or what are the likely consequences of ture, rainfall, and traffic information will facilitate
noncompliance with specifications development of simplified procedures to satisfy input
requirements
Once a user agency has the capability to use mecha­ In summary, decide what types of distress should
nistic design procedures, it can be anticipated that control design and establish threshold values for each
many additional applications will be found type, i e , how much cracking or faulting is consid­
An agency should be aware that the development ered acceptable before maintenance or rehabilitation
implementation of mechanistic design procedures will costs become excessive
require a commitment of resources and, in general, it
will require special training for persons involved in
the implementation phase 1.4.2 Input Data
Principles of mechanistic design procedures for
flexible pavements have been developed through more In order to make the necessary calculations, it will
than 20 years of research However, for implementa­ be necessary to obtain information pertaining to mate­
tion, some special attention will need to be given to rial properties, environment, and traffic patterns
the seven items previously enumerated A brief dis­ When obtaining information concerning material
cussion of these items follows; agency personnel properties, it will be necessary to acquire special test­
should be aware that this is an overview and that varia­ ing equipment if such equipment is not already on
tions are likely for any specific case hand This equipment for laboratory and field testing
Mechanistic-Empirical Design Procedures 1V-9

is commercially available and some laboratory equip­ computer models will shortly make it possible to run
ment can be fabricated in-house if preferred most mechanistic design procedures and structural
Equipment requirements will depend on data re­ analysis programs on a desk-top personal computer
quirements as follows: This capability will have a profound impact on mak­
ing mechanistic design procedures much more user
Resilient Modulus o f Soil and Granular Mate­ friendly and accessible to the practicing highway
rials. Refers to laboratory repeated-load testing pavement design engineer
equipment for cohesive and noncohesive soil and The computer software for the new mechanistic
granular materials Both confined and unconfined test pavement design procedures must be installed on the
capabilities will be required agency mainframe and/or personal computers This is
normally not difficult with a well-documented pro­
Resilient Modulus o f Stabilized Materials. Re­ gram However, it is most important to verily care­
fers to laboratory repeated-load testing equipment for fully that the program is performing as required Test
asphalt concrete, portland cement concrete, and programs should be run where the correct solutions
materials stabilized with asphalt, cement, lime, lime- are available for verification In addition, the design
flyash, or cement-flyash combinations engineer should make numerous runs of the program
after changing the design inputs over a practical range
Deflection Basin Measurement Equipment. Re­ to evaluate the sensitivity of the design procedure to
fers to field testing equipment capable of measuring changes in design inputs This will not only help to
the deflection basin several feet from the loading provide confidence in the design procedure, but also
plate, preferably at different load magnitudes includ­ show which inputs are most significant; that is, which
ing the design truck wheel loading (e g , 9,000 values should be determined accurately and which
pounds) The deflection basin data can then be used ones can be estimated
in conjunction with computer programs to “ back
calculate” the in situ resilient moduli of the pavement
layers and the roadbed soil
1.4.5 Training Personnel

1.4.3 Equipment Acquisition Mechanistic design procedures may utilize con­

cepts, procedures, and equipment with which the
This refers to special equipment designed to facili­ practicing pavement design engineer is not familiar
tate field data collection, e g , nondestructive testing Thus, it is often important that some training accom­
pany the implementation of the mechanistic design
equipment, road meters, etc
It will be important in obtaining the necessary procedure This training could cover some or all of the
equipment to ensure the equipment is designed to fur­ following
nish the information needed by the mechanistic proce­ (1) structural analysis of pavements,
dure In some situations, equipment owned by an (2) procedures for estimating distress or
agency may not be suitable There is a tendency to try pavement damage,
and establish correlations between pieces of equip­ (3) effects of climate on pavement performance,
ment to avoid replacement Such correlations should (4) nondestructive testing and interpretation,
be discouraged since they will inevitably introduce (5) use of computers (particularly personal
error into the procedure If such correlations are con­ computers),
sidered to be imperative, they should be made using (6) laboratory repeated-load testing methods and
well-planned experiment designs interpretation,
(7) knowledge of basic materials properties
related to pavement design, and
1.4.4 Computer Hardware and Software (8) pavement evaluation

Nearly all mechanistic design procedures will re­ Some of the above information is available from
quire some type of computer hardware and software to training courses provided by the National Highway
perform the detailed computations that are necessary Institute of the Federal Highway Administration
Most current procedures requiie a mainframe com­ Also, a few universities offer short courses in pave­
puter However, the capability of the latest personal ment design and rehabilitation that may cover several
IV-10 Design of Pavement Structures

of the above topics Consultants are also available to (4) The estimates are compared with actual field
assist with “ hands-on” training programs if needed observations of distress to determine calibra­
tion factors A calibration procedure such as
this will result in realistic pavement designs
and will provide the needed confidence and
1.4.6 Field Testing and Calibration credibility for the mechanistic approach

The most important step in the implementation pro­

cess is field testing and calibration of the predictive 1.4.7 Testing
models that are utilized in the mechanistic design pro­
cedure Even though a mechanistic design procedure After the calibration process has been completed,
is developed using basic material properties and struc­ the prediction models developed for each distress type
tural analysis techniques, there are still numerous should be tested on a wide range of projects for which
assumptions and simplifications that must be made in performance information is available Some final ad­
its development In fact, most mechanistic procedures justments in the distress models may be necessary as
actually include a combination of mechanistic and em­ part of this final step The agency should maintain an
pirical predictive models that are used in the design on-going program of data acquisition to continually
process For example, there is also the problem of improve the system
climate, which is so complex that it will never be At the completion of this final testing, the agency
completely modeled in pavement design Thus, will have a verified, reliable mechanistic-empirical
climate, aging, and other factors must be considered design system with capabilities beyond the usual em­
empirically pirical design methods
It is necessary to ensure that the predictive models
used in the mechanistic design procedure (e g ,
fatigue cracking, rutting, joint deterioration, faulting) 1.5 SUMMARY
actually give reasonable predictions for the geo­
graphic regions under consideration Thus, climate, The benefits of implementing mechanistic-empiri­
materials, thickness combinations, and traffic should cal design procedures for new pavement construction,
be included in the experiment design for calibration reconstruction, and/or rehabilitation are many The
If this verification/calibration testing is not accom­ benefits occur on both the network pavement manage­
plished, there is a risk that the mechanistic design ment level as well as the project level The key benefit
procedures will provide results that are not acceptable is in providing the designer with powerful tools to
or accurate evaluate the performance (specific distress types) of
An example calibration is summarized as follows: different pavement designs, instead of relying solely
on limited empirical correlations or opinions
(1) Obtain data from at least 20 actual field test Many different pavement design factors can be ex­
pavements that have been selected with known amined using a mechanistic design approach Those
design, materials, traffic, and climate data which improve the performance of individual pave­
The sections should range from extensive ment components can be identified and a life-cycle
distress to very little distress or overall deterio­ cost analysis conducted to determine the cost-
ration effectiveness of the design modification Thus, mech­
(2) The inputs to the structural analysis model anistic design has the potential to improve pavement
should be obtained as specified in the design design and to provide more reliable design proce­
procedure (e g , strain, stress, strength, resil­ dures
ient modulus, number of applied traffic loads, The widespread acquisition and use of personal
climate, e tc ) for each of the field pavement computers that are capable of handling mechanistic
sections design programs will also provide a much more user-
(3) Distress estimates should be computed for friendly and practical design environment for the
each section using the appropriate output from pavement designer This is expected to greatly in­
the structural analysis combined with damage crease the potential for use of mechanistic design pro­
criteria cedures
 REFERENCES FOR PART IV

1 Bradbury, R D , “ Reinforced Concrete Pave­ System,” Geotechnique, Volume 2, pp 293-

ments,” Wire Reinforcement Institute, Wash­ 300, 1951
ington, D C , 1938 9 Palmer, L A , “The Evaluation of Wheel Load
2 Friberg, B F , “ Load and Deflection Charac­ Bearing Capacities of Flexible Types of
teristics of Dowels in Transverse Joints of Pavements,” Proceedings, Highway Research
Concrete Pavements,” Proceedings, Highway Board, 1946
Research Board, 1938 10 Southgate, H F , Deen, R C , and Havens,
3. Newmark, N M , “ Influence Charts for Com­ J H , “ Development of a Thickness Design
putation of Stresses in Elastic Foundations,” System for Bituminous Concrete Pavements,”
University of Illinois Engineering Experiment Research Report UKTRP-81-20, Kentucky
Station Bulletin 338, 1942 Transportation Research Program, University
4 Pickett, G , Raville, M E , Janes, W C , and of Kentucky, November 1981
McCormick, F J , “ Deflection, Moments and 11 “ Thickness Design—Asphalt Pavements for
Reactive Pressures for Concrete Pavements,” Highways and Streets,” The Asphalt Institute,
Kansas State College Experiment Station Manual Series No 1, September 1981
Bulletin 65, 1951 12 “ Shell Pavement Design Manual,” Shell
5 Pickett, G , and Ray, G K , “ Influence Charts International Petroleum Company, 1978
for Rigid Pavements,” Transactions, ASCE, 13 “Thickness Design for Concrete Pavement,”
1951 Portland Cement Association, 1966, with revi­
6 Burmister, D M , “The Theory of Stresses and sions in 1984
Displacements in Layered Systems and Appli- 14 Van Til, C J , McCullough, B F , Vallerga,
cation to the Design of Airport Runways,” B A , and Hicks, R G , “ Evaluation of In­
Proceedings, Highway Research Board, 1943 terim Guides for Design of Pavement National
7 McLeod, N W , “ Some Basic Problems in Cooperative Highway Program, 128, 1972
Flexible Pavement Design,” Proceedings, 15 Finn, F N , and Monismith, C L , “Asphalt
Highway Research Board, 1953 Overlay Design Procedures;” National Coop­
8 Acum, W E A , and Fox, L , “ Computation erative Highway Research Synthesis Report,
of Load Stresses in a Three-Layer Elastic Project 20-5 (in publication, 1985)

IV-11
APPENDICES
 APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Analysis Period The period of time for which the Load Transfer Device A mechanical means de­
economic analysis is to be made, ordinarily will signed to carry loads across a joint in a rigid
include at least one rehabilitation activity slab
Base Course The layer or layers of specified or Longitudinal Joint A joint normally placed be­
selected material of designed thickness placed on a tween traffic lanes in rigid pavements to control
subbase or a subgrade to support a surface course longitudinal cracking
Composite Pavement A pavement structure com­ Low-Volume Road A roadway generally subjected
posed of an asphalt concrete wearing surface and to low levels of traffic, in this Guide, structural
Portland cement concrete slab, an asphalt concrete design is based on a range of 18-kip ESAL’s from
overlay on a PCC slab is also referred to as a com­ 50,000 to 1,000,000 for flexible and rigid pave­
posite pavement ments, and from 10,000 to 100,000 for aggregate-
Construction Joint A joint made necessary by a surfaced roads
prolonged interruption in the placing of concrete Maintenance The preservation of the entire road­
Contraction Joint A joint normally placed at recur­ way, including surface, shoulders, roadsides, struc­
rent intervals in a rigid slab to control transverse tures, and such traffic control devices as are
cracking necessary for its safe and efficient utilization
Deformed Bar A reinforcing bar for rigid slabs Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k) Westergaard’s
conforming to “ Requirements for Deformations,” modulus of subgrade reaction for use in rigid pave­
in AASHTO Designations M 31, M 42, or M 53 ment design (the load in pounds per square inch on
Dowel A load transfer device in a rigid slab, usually a loaded area of the roadbed soil or subbase divided
consisting of a plain round steel bar by the deflection in inches of the roadbed soil or
Drainage Coefficients Factors used to modify layer subbase, psi/in )
coefficients in flexible pavements or stresses in Panel Length The distance between adjacent trans­
rigid pavements as a function of how well the pave­ verse joints
ment structure can handle the adverse effect of Pavement Performance The trend of serviceability
water infiltration with load applications
Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL’s) Summa­ Pavement Rehabilitation Work undertaken to ex­
tion of equivalent 18,000-pound single axle loads tend the service life of an existing facility This
used to combine mixed traffic to design traffic for includes placement of additional surfacing material
the design period and/or other work necessary to return an existing
Expansion Joint A joint located to provide for ex­ roadway, including shoulders, to a condition of
pansion of a rigid slab, without damage to itself, structural or functional adequacy This could in­
adjacent slabs, or structures clude the complete removal and replacement of the
Flexible Pavement A pavement structure which pavement structure
maintains intimate contact with and distributes Pavement Structure A combination of subbase,
loads to the subgrade and depends on aggregate base course, and surface course placed on a sub­
interlock, particle friction, and cohesion for grade to support the traffic load and distribute it to
stability the roadbed
Layer Coefficient (aj, a2, a3) The empirical rela­ Performance Period The period of time that an
tionship between structural number (SN) and layer initially constructed or rehabilitated pavement
thickness which expresses the relative ability of a structure will last (perform) before reaching its ter­
material to function as a structural component of minal serviceability; this is also referred to as the
the pavement design p e r io d

A -l
A-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

Prepared Roadbed In-place roadbed soils com­ Subbase The layer or layers of specified or selected
pacted or stabilized according to provisions of material of designed thickness placed on a sub­
applicable specifications grade to support a base course (or in the case of
Present Serviceability Index (PSI, p) A number rigid pavements, the portland cement concrete
derived by formula for estimating the serviceability slab)
rating from measurements of certain physical Subgrade The top surface of a roadbed upon which
features of the pavement the pavement structure and shoulders are con­
Pumping The ejection of foundation material, structed
either wet or dry, through joints or cracks, or along Surface Course One or more layers of a pavement
edges of rigid slabs resulting from vertical move­ structure designed to accommodate the traffic load,
ments of the slab under traffic the top layer of which resists skidding, traffic
Reinforcement Steel embedded in a rigid slab to abrasion, and the disintegrating effects of climate
resist tensile stresses and detrimental opening of The top layer of flexible pavements is sometimes
cracks called “ wearing course ”
Resilient Modulus A measure of the modulus of Tandem Axle Load The total load transmitted to the
elasticity of roadbed soil or other pavement road by two consecutive axles extending across the
material full width of the vehicle (N o t e : The spacing of the
Rigid Pavement A pavement structure which dis­ tandem axles used at the AASHTO Road Test was
tributes loads to the subgrade, having as one course 48 inches )
Tie Bar A deformed steel bar or connector em­
a portland cement concrete slab of relatively high-
bedded across a joint in a rigid slab to prevent
bending resistance
separation of abutting slabs
Roadbed The graded portion of a highway between
Traffic Equivalence Factor (e) A numerical factor
top and side slopes, prepared as a foundation for
that expresses the relationship of a given axle load
the pavement structure and shoulder
to another axle load in terms of their effect on the
Roadbed Material The material below the subgrade
serviceability of a pavement structure In this
in cuts and embankments and in embankment foun­
Guide, all axle loads are equated in terms of the
dations, extending to such depth as affects the
equivalent number of repetitions of an 18-kip axle
support of the pavement structure
Triple (Tridem) Axle Load The total load transmit­
Selected Material A suitable native material ob­
ted to the road by three consecutive axles extending
tained from a specified source such as a particular
across the full width of the vehicle (N ote There
roadway cut or borrow area, of a suitable material
were no tridem axles at the AASHTO Road Test,
having specified characteristics to be used for a however, the spacing that may be inferred for con­
specific purpose secutive triple axles (based on the tandem axle
Serviceability The ability at time of observation of spacings) is 48 inches )
a pavement to serve traffic (autos and trucks) which Welded Wire Fabric (WWF) A Two-way reinforce­
use the facility ment system for rigid slabs, fabricated from cold-
Single Axle Load The total load transmitted by all drawn steel wire, having parallel longitudinal wires
wheels of a single axle extending the full width of welded at regular intervals to parallel transverse
the vehicle wires The wires may be either smooth or de­
Structural Number (SN) An index number derived formed Deformed wire (used in deformed wire
from an analysis of traffic, roadbed soil conditions, fabric, DWF) is that which has uniformly spaced
and environment which may be converted to thick­ deformations which inhibit longitudinal movement
ness of flexible pavement layers through the use of of the wire and which conform to “ Specifications
suitable layer coefficients related to the type of ma­ for Welded Deformed Steel Wire Fabric for
terial being used in each layer of the pavement Concrete Reinforcement,” AASHTO Designa­
structure tion—M 221
 APPENDIX B
PAVEMENT TYPE SELECTION GUIDELINES

B .l GENERAL generally applicable to both new and reconstructed

pavements One group includes those factors which
The highway engineer or administrator does not may have major influence and may dictate the pave­
have at his disposal an absolute or undisputable ment type in some instances. Some of the major
method for determining the type of pavement which factors are also incorporated in the basic design proce­
should be selected for a given set of conditions How­ dures and influence the structural requirements of the
ever, the selection of pavement type should be an pavement design or subgrade and embankment treat­
integral part of any pavement management program ments In such cases they are assigned an economic
The selection of pavement type is not an exact value for comparative purposes The second group
science but one in which the highway engineer or includes those factors which have a lesser influence
administrator must make a judgement on many vary­ and are usually taken into account when there are no
ing factors such as traffic, soils, weather, materials, overriding considerations or one type is not clearly
construction, maintenance, and environment The superior from an economic standpoint A flow chart
pavement type selection may be dictated by an overrid­ of pavement selection procedure incorporating the
ing consideration for one or more of these factors major and secondary factors is shown in Figure B 1
The selection process may be facilitated by com­
parison of alternate structural designs for one or more
pavement types using theoretical or empirically de­ B.2 PRINCIPAL FACTORS
rived methods However, such methods are not so
precise as to guarantee a certain level of performance 1. Traffic
from any one alternate or comparable service for all
alternates While the total volume of traffic affects the
Also, comparative cost estimates can be applied to geometric requirements of the highway, the per­
alternate pavement designs to aid in the decision­ centage of commercial traffic and frequency of
making process The cost for the service of the pave­ heavy load applications generally have the major
ment would include not only the initial cost but also effect on the structural design of the pavement
subsequent cost to maintain the service level desired Traffic forecasts for design purposes have gen­
It should be recognized that such procedures are not erally projected normal growth in the immediate
precise since reliable data for maintenance, subse­ corridor with an appropriate allowance for
quent stages for construction, or corrective work and changes in land use and potential commercial and
salvage value are not always available, and it is usually industrial development However, experience
necessary to project costs to some future point in time over the past several decades has shown that the
Also, economic analyses are generally altruistic in construction of new major highway facilities di­
that they do not consider the present or future finan­ verts large amounts of heavy traffic from other
cial capabilities of the contracting agency routes in a broad traffic corridor This, coupled
Even if structural design and cost comparative pro­ with a decline in the quantity of railroad services,
cedures were perfected, they would not by their nature has resulted in a considerable underestimation of
encompass all factors which should be considered in traffic growth, particularly commercial traffic
pavement type determination Such a determination Also, the future availability and cost of motor
should properly be one of professional engineering fuels could result in increased legal loads to
judgement based on the consideration and evaluation which pavement structures could be subjected
of all factors applicable to a given highway section during their design period
The factors which may have some influence in the For these reasons, pavement designs for major
decisionmaking process are discussed below They are facilities should incorporate an appropriate mar-

B -l
B-2 Design o f Pavement Structures
Appendix B B-3

gin of safety in the traffic factor Agencies may into consideration the conditions pertaining to the
choose to establish minimum structural require­ particular climatic belt
ments for all alternate pavement types to ensure
adequate performance and service life for major
facilities Alternate strategies, or combinations of
initial design, rehabilitation and maintenance, 4. Construction Considerations
can be developed to provide equivalent service
over a given period of time although the initial Stage construction of the pavement structure
designs are not equivalent For heavily traveled may dictate the type of pavement selected Other
facilities in congested locations, the need to mini­ considerations such as speed of construction, ac­
mize the disruptions and hazards to traffic may commodating traffic during construction, safety
dictate the selection of those strategies having to traffic during construction, ease of replace­
long initial service life with little maintenance or ment, anticipated future widening, seasons of the
rehabilitation regardless of relative economics year when construction must be accomplished,
and perhaps others may have a strong influence
on paving type selections in specific cases

2. Soils Characteristics
5. Recycling
The load-carrying capability of a native soil,
which forms the subgrade for the pavement struc­ The opportunity to recycle material from an
ture, is of paramount importance in pavement existing pavement structure or other sources may
performance Even in given limited areas the in­ dictate the use of one pavement type Future recy­
herent qualities of such native soils are far from cling opportunities may also be considered
uniform, and they are further subjected to varia­
tions by the influence of weather
The characteristics of native soils not only di­
rectly affect the pavement structure design but 6. Cost Comparison
may, in certain cases, dictate the type of pavement
economically justified for a given location As an Where there are no overriding factors and sev­
example, problem soils that change volume with eral alternate pavement types would serve satis­
time frequently require stage construction to pro­ factorily, cost comparison can be used to assist in
vide an acceptable riding surface determining pavement type
Unavoidably, there will be instances where fi­
nancial circumstances are such as to make first
costs the dominate factor in selection, even
3. Weather though higher maintenance or repair costs may be
involved at a later date Where circumstances per­
Weather affects subgrade as well as the pave­ mit, a more realistic measure is cost on the basis
ment wearing course The amount of rainfall, of service life or service rendered by a pavement
snow and ice, and frost penetration will season­ structure Such costs should include the initial
ally influence the bearing capacity of subgrade construction cost, the cost of subsequent stages or
materials Moisture, freezing and thawing, and corrective work, anticipated life, maintenance
winter clearing operations will affect pavement costs, and salvage value Costs to road users dur­
wearing surfaces as to performance and mainte­ ing periods of reconstruction or maintenance op­
nance costs These surfaces, in turn, will have erations are also appropriate for consideration
some effect on the ease of winter clearing opera­ Although pavement structures are based on an
tions due to differences in thermal absorption or initial design period, few are abandoned at the
to the ability of the pavement to resist damage end of that period and continue to serve as part of
from snow and ice control equipment or ma­ the future pavement structure For this reason, the
terials analysis period should be of sufficient duration to
In drawing upon the performance record of include a representative reconstruction of all
pavements elsewhere, it is most important to take pavement types
B-4 Design of Pavement Structures

B.3 SECONDARY FACTORS 5. Traffic Safety

1. Performance of Similar Pavements The particular characteristics of a wearing

in the Area course surface, the need for delineation through
pavement and shoulder contrast, reflectivity un­
To a large degree, the experience and judge­ der highway lighting, and the maintenance of a
nonskid surface as affected by the available mate­
ment of the highway engineer is based on the
rials may each influence the paving type selection
performance of pavements in the immediate area
in specific locations
of his jurisdiction Past performance is a valuable
guide, provided there is good correlation between
conditions and service requirements between the
6. Incorporation of Experimental Features
reference pavements and the designs under study
Caution must be urged against reliance on short­
In some instances, the performance of new
term performance records, and on those long­ materials or design concepts must be determined
term records of pavements which may have been by field testing under actual construction, envi­
subjected to much lighter loadings for a large por­ ronmental, or traffic conditions Where the mate­
tion of their present life The need for periodic re­ rial or concept is adaptable to only one paving
analysis of performance is apparent type, the incorporation of such experimental fea­
tures may dictate pavement type selection

2. Adjacent Existing Pavements 7. Stimulation of Competition

Provided there is no radical change in condi­ It is desirable that monopoly situations be

tions, the choice of paving type on a highway may avoided, and that improvement in products and
be influenced by adjacent existing sections which methods be encouraged through continued and
have given adequate service The resultant conti­ healthy competition among industries involved in
nuity of pavement type will also simplify mainte­ the production of paving materials
nance operations Where alternative pavement designs have com­
parable initial costs, including the attendant costs
of earthwork, drainage facilities, and other ap­
purtenances, and provide comparable service life
3. Conservation of Materials and Energy or life-cycle cost, the highway agency may elect
to take alternate bids to stimulate competition and
obtain lower prices If this procedure is used, it is
Pavement selection may be influenced by the
essential that good engineering practices and
pavement type which contains less of a scarce
product improvement are not abandoned for the
critical material or the type whose material pro­
purpose of making cost more competitive
duction, transportation, and placement requires
Where several materials will adequately serve
less energy consumption
as a component within the pavement structure,
such as a subbase or a base course, contractors
should be permitted the option of using any of the
approved materials
4. Availability of Local Materials or
Contractor Capabilities
8. Municipal Preference, Participating Local
The availability and adaptability of local mate­ Government Preference and Recognition of
rial may influence the selection of pavement type Local Industry
Also, the availability of commercially produced
mixes and the equipment capabilities of area con­ While these considerations seem outside the
tractors may influence the selection of pavement realm of the highway engineer, they cannot al­
type, particularly on small projects ways be ignored by the highway administrator,
Appendix B B-5

especially if all other factors involved are indeci­ ence, to various degrees, the determination of paving
sive as to the pavement type to select types This has brought to the fore the need, in certain
areas, for the development of basic information that is
not available at present It has also served to point out,
B .4 CONCLUSION in general, that conditions are so variable and influ­
ences sufficiently different from locality to locality to
In the foregoing, there have been listed and dis­ necessitate a study of individual projects in most in­
cussed those factors and considerations which influ­ stances
 APPENDIX C
ALTERNATE METHODS OF DESIGN
FOR PAVEMENT STRUCTURES

Each of the 50 states have developed methods of (b) Research and Development of The
design for new construction and for overlays Many of Asphalt Institute’s Thickness Design
the states have used information and procedures con­ Manual (MS-1) Ninth Edition, Research
tained in the 1972 version of the AASHTO Interim Report No 82-2-RR-82-2 August 1982
Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures It can be (c) Computer Program DAMA, User’s
expected that these states will adapt information from Manual CP-1, October 1983
this revision (1986) to the Guide as the basis for up­ (d) The Asphalt Institute
dating design procedures as seems appropriate The Asphalt Institute Building
latest state procedures are available by contacting the College Park, Maryland 20740
appropriate authorities in each of the states 2 The National Crushed Stone Association
In addition to methods adopted by the states, pave­ (a) Flexible Pavement Design Guide of
ment design procedures have been developed by Highways, 1972
private industry, often through related associations (b) National Crushed Stone Association
This Appendix includes a representative listing of
1415 Elliot Place, N W
such methods
Washington, D C 20007
The U S Army Corps of Engineers and U S For­
3 U S Army Corps of Engineers
est Service (Department of Agriculture) have devel­
Roads, Streets, Walks and Open Storage
oped design methods for use on military installations
Areas, Flexible Pavement Design, U S
and Forest Service roads and are referenced herein
The Federal Highway Administration sponsors re­ Army Technical Manual, TM-5-822-5,
search and development related to pavement design May 1980
and has recently issued reports indicative of activities 4 Shell Method
in this area These methods are considered to be in the (a) Shell Pavement Design Method, 1978
development stage and have not been officially Shell International Petroleum Company
adopted by FHWA Limited, London
This Appendix is divided into five (5) sections; C 1 (b) Koole, R C and Visser, W , “ The New
and C 2 for the design of new flexible- and rigid-type Shell Method for Asphalt Pavements and
pavements, respectively, C 3 for design of overlays, Overlay Design,” Proceedings,
C 4 for structural analysis, and C 5 for low-volume Canadian Technical Asphalt Association,
roads Volume XXIII, November 1978, p 2 42
The reports on structural analysis describe analyti­
cal procedures to calculate stress, strain, or deforma­
tion in pavement structures
The design procedures included in this Appendix C.2 RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN
are not intended as a complete list; however, they do
provide representative information from a variety of 1 Portland Cement Association
sources (a) Thickness Design for Concrete Highway
and Street Pavements, 1984
(b) Portland Cement Association
C.1 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN 5420 Old Orchard Road
Skokie, Illinois 60077-4321
1 The Asphalt Institute 2 Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
(a) Thickness Design—Asphalt Pavements “ Design of Continuously Reinforced
for Highways and Streets, 1981 (MS-1) Concrete for Highways,” Concrete

C-l
C-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

Reinforcing Steel Institute, 933 North (c) Majidzadeh, K and lives, G ,

Plum Grove Road; Schaumburg, “ Evaluation of Rigid Pavement Overlay
Illinois 60195, 1981 Design Procedure, Development of the
OAR Procedure,” FHWA/RD-83/090,
Resource International, Worthington,
Ohio, July 1983
C.3 OVERLAY DESIGN

1 The Asphalt Institute C.4 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

(a) “Asphalt Overlays for Highways and
Street Rehabilitation,” The Asphalt 1 VESYS II for flexible pavements
Institute, Manual Series No 17, 1983 Rauhut, J B , O’Quin, J C , and
(1) Deflection Procedure Hudson, W R , “ Sensitivity Analysis of
(2) Effective Thickness Procedure FHWA Structural Model VESYS II,”
(b) The Asphalt Institute Volume 2, Sensitivity Analysis, Report
Asphalt Institute Building No FHWA-RD-76-24, 1976
College Park, Maryland 20740 2 ILLIPAVE for flexible pavements
2 Portland Cement Association Road, L and Figueroa, J L , “ Load
(a) “ Design of Concrete Overlays for Response of Transportation Support
Pavements,” ACI 324 1R-67 Journal Systems,” Journal, ASCE TE-1, 1980
ACI, August 1967 3. National Cooperative Highway Research
(b) “ Guide to Concrete Resurfacing Design Program, Project 1-10B
and Selection Criteria,” 1981 PCA, “ The Use of Distress Prediction
1981 Subsystems for the Design of Pavement
(c) Portland Cement Association Structures,” Proceedings, Fourth
5240 Old Orchard Road International Conference on Structural
Skokie, Illinois 60077-4321 Design of Asphalt Pavements,
3 Shell Method University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
(a) Claessen, A I M and Ditmarsch, R , Michigan, 1977
“ Pavement Evaluation and Overlay 4 ILLISLAB for concrete pavements
Design, The Shell Method,” Tabatabaie, A M , Barenberg, E J ,
Proceedings, Fourth International and Smith, R E , “ Longitudinal Joint
Conference on the Structural Design of Systems in Slip-Formed Rigid
Asphalt Pavements, University of Pavements,” Volume II, Analysis of
Michigan, August 1977 Load Transfer Pavements, Report No
(b) Koole, R C , “ Overlay Design Based FAA-RD-79-4-11, 1979
on Falling Weight Deflectometer 5 SLAB-49 for concrete pavements
Measurements,” Transportation Hudson, W R and Matlock, H ,
Research Record No 700, “ Discrete-Element Analysis for
Transportation Research Board, Discontinuous Plates,” ASCE, Volume
Washington, D C , 1979, pp 59-72 ST 10, 1968
4 Federal Highway Administration
(a) Majidzadeh, K and lives, G , “ Flexible
Pavement Overlay Design Procedures,” C.5 LOW-VOLUME ROAD
Volume 1, Evaluation and Modification SURFACE DESIGN
of the Design Methods,
FHWA/RD-81/032, Resource 1 U S Department of Agriculture
International, Worthington, Ohio 1981 (a) Surfacing Handbook
(b) Austin Research Engineers, Inc , FSH 7709 56a
“Asphalt Concrete Overlays of Flexible Forest Service
Pavements,” Volume I, Development of (b) USDA-Forest Service
New Design Criteria, FHWA Report P O Box 2417
No FHWA-RD-75-75, August 1975 Washington, D C 20013
 APPENDIX D
CONVERSION OF MIXED TRAFFIC
TO EQUIVALENT SINGLE AXLE LOADS
FOR PAVEMENT DESIGN

D .l GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS From 1970 to 1983, the percent of the total volume
made up of passenger cars and buses (on rural Inter­
Part I of this Guide outlines the fact that estimates state highways) decreased from 77 to 63, while the
of the amount of traffic and its characteristics play a percent of the traffic stream made up of 5-axle or
primary role in the pavement design and analysis pro­ more combinations increased from 9 to 17 Between
cess Parts II and III require traffic information for 1970 and 1983, the total equivalent single axle loads
design of pavement structures This Appendix pro­ increased by 105 percent The significant point is that
vides guidelines for estimating the number of equiva­ if pavements had been designed in 1970, assuming a
lent single axle loads which can be expected to be constant traffic growth for all types of vehicles, a seri­
applied to a pavement during a specified design period ous underdesign of pavements would have resulted
or to estimate equivalent axle load applications that Users of this Guide are cautioned that what are
have been applied to existing pavements Although discussed are nationwide summary data Trends
typical and historical traffic parameters are furnished within a given state, or corridor within a state, may
in this Appendix for illustrative purposes, pavement vary significantly This can happen for a number of
designers and analysts are cautioned to use the best reasons, including economic conditions, industry lo­
locally available data to represent specific site condi­ cational patterns, truck weight laws, enforcement in­
tions Such traffic data should be available from the tensity, equipment changes by the trucking industry,
designing agency as part of its regular traffic monitor­ etc Pavement designers should be particularly sensi­
ing effort As the science of pavement design and tive to the changes which will likely take place on the
management matures, it is vital that a close working nationwide basis as a result of the Surface Transporta­
relationship exists among these groups tion Assistance Act (STAA) of 1982 As a result of this
There are currently major initiatives underway to legislation, there may well be (1) significant changes
improve the quality of traffic data Statistically based in both truck weights within particular vehicle catego­
programs for traffic monitoring are being adopted in ries and shifts to different equipment (twin trailers),
many states Microcomputer technology is rapidly im­ (2) changes in position of load application due to
proving the ability of planners to assemble better traf­ wider trucks, and (3) increased intensity of use on
fic data using automatic vehicle classifiers and certain routes designated for these new vehicle config­
weigh-in-motion (WIM) installations urations Additionally, deregulation of the trucking
History has clearly shown that while it may be pos­ industry will likely change the portion of trucks travel­
sible to accurately measure today’s traffic, the charac­ ing empty in many corridors
teristics of this traffic change over time With the These discussions highlight the need for each state
exception of interruptions during petroleum shortages to be conducting a comprehensive program of traffic
in recent years, a rather constant increase in traffic is counting, vehicle classification, and truck weighing
evident This type of information, plus forecasts of These changing traffic trends can be expected to have
population, land use, economic factors, etc , are used significant influences on the lives of existing pave­
by transportation planners to forecast future travel At ments and on the design of new pavements
the local level, such forecasts are generally developed To use the pavement design procedures presented
on a system basis and on most high level highways for in this Guide, mixed traffic must be converted to an
specific corridors These should be used in the pave­ equivalent number of 18-kip single axle loads The
ment design process procedure for accomplishing this conversion includes

D -l
D-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

(1) derivation of load equivalence factors, If the number of equivalent axle loads represents
(2) conversion of mixed traffic to 18-kip equiva­ the total for all lanes and both directions of travel, this
lent single axle load (ESAL) applications, and number must be distributed by direction and by lanes
(3) lane distribution considerations for design purposes Directional distribution is usu­
ally made by assigning 50 percent of the traffic to each
To express varying axle loads in terms of a single
direction, unless special considerations (such as more
design parameter, it is necessary to develop axle load
loaded trucks moving in one direction and more empty
equivalence factors These factors, when multiplied
trucks in the other) warrant some other distribution
by the number of axle loads within a given weight
In regard to lane distribution, most states assign 100
category, give the number of 18-kip single axle load
percent of the traffic in each direction (i e , 50 percent
applications which will have an equivalent effect on
of the total) to the design lane Some states have devel­
the performance of the pavement structures
oped lane distribution factors for multilane facilities
Load equivalency factors represent the ratio of the
The range of factors used is presented below
number of repetitions of any axle load and axle con­
figuration (single, tandem, tridem) necessary to cause
the same reduction in PSI as one application of an 18- Number of Lanes Percent of 18-kip ESAL
kip single axle load Load equivalency factors are pre­ in Both Directions Traffic in Design Lane
sented later in Tables D 1 through D 18 for a range
of pavement structural combinations, axle configura­ 1 100
tions, and terminal serviceability values of 2 0, 2 5, 2 80-100
and 3 0 Appendix MM of Volume 2 presents the 3 60-80
AASHO Road Test-based equations that were used to 4 or more 50-75
generate these tables It also provides some support
fox .tending the tables to tridem axle loadings
The prediction of traffic (ESAL’s) for design pur­ If lane or directional distribution factors are
poses must rely on information from past traffic, mod­ utilized and pavements are designed on the basis of
ified by factors for growth or other expected changes distributed traffic, consideration should be given to
Most states, in cooperation with FHWA, accumulate the use of variable cross sections Heavier structural
past traffic information in the form of truck weight sections in the outside lanes should be considered if
study data W-4 tables Typical information includes warranted by the lane distribution analysis
(1) axle weight distributions in 2,000-lb intervals, (2) In view of the increased emphasis on improved
ESAL’s for all trucks weighed, (3) ESAL’s per 1,000 traffic monitoring made possible by weigh-in-motion
trucks weighed by truck class, (4) ESAL’s for all (WIM) and automatic vehicle classification and count­
trucks counted, and (5) percent distribution of ESAL’s ing, it is recommended that each state develop appro­
by truck class priate factors for multilane facilities
To arrive at the design ESAL’s, it is necessary to
assume a structural number (SN) for flexible pave­
ments or slab thickness (D) for rigid pavements, and D.2 CALCULATING ESAL APPLICATIONS
then select the equivalence factors listed in Tables D 1
through D 18 The use of an SN of 5 0 or a D of 9 When calculating ESAL’s for the design of a partic­
inches for the determination of 18-kip single axle ular project, it is convenient to convert the estimated
equivalence factors will normally give results that are traffic distribution into truck load factors Two meth­
sufficiently accurate for design purposes, even though ods of calculating truck load factors from W-4 infor­
the final design may be somewhat different If in mation are summarized in the following paragraphs of
error, this assumption will usually result in an over­ this section
estimation of 18-kip equivalent single axles When Where axle load information is available from a
more accurate results are desired and the computed weigh station that can be assumed to be representative
design is appreciably different (1 inch of PCC for of traffic for the pavement to be designed, the truck
rigid or 1 inch of asphalt concrete for flexible) from load factor can be calculated directly For example,
the assumed value, a new value should be assumed, assume that the data in Figure D 1 illustrates the
the design 18-kip ESAL traffic (w18) recomputed, and weighing of 5-axle, tractor semi-trailer trucks at a
the structural design determined for the new w t8 The specific weigh station Traffic (load) equivalency fac­
procedure should be continued until the assumed and tors are obtained from Table D 4, the number of axles
computed values are as close as desired represents the grouping or distribution of weights
Appendix D D-3

Table D .l. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements, Single Axles and pt of 2.0
Pavement S tructural N um ber (SN)
kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002

4 002 003 002 002 002 002
6 009 .012 O il 010 009 009
8 030 035 036 033 031 029
10 075 085 090 085 079 076
12 165 177 189 183 174 168
14 325 338 354 350 338 331
16 589 598 613 612 603 596
18 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00
20 1 61 1 59 1 56 1 55 1 57 1 59
22 2 49 2 44 2 35 2 31 2 35 2 41
24 3 71 3 62 3 43 3 33 3 40 3 51
26 5.36 5 21 4 88 4 68 4 77 4 96
28 7 54 7 31 6 78 6 42 6 52 6 83
30 10 4 10 0 92 86 87 92
32 14 0 13 5 12 4 11 5 11 5 12 1
34 18 5 17 9 16 3 15 0 14 9 15 6
36 24 2 23 3 21 2 19 3 19 0 19 9
38 31 1 29 9 27 1 24 6 24 0 25 1
40 39 6 38 0 34 3 30 9 30 0 31 2
42 49 7 47 7 43 0 38 6 37 2 38 5
44 61 8 59 3 53 4 47 6 45 7 47 1
46 76 1 73 0 65 6 58 3 55 7 57 0
48 92 9 89 1 80 0 70 9 67 3 68 6
50 113 108 97 86 81 82
j r Design o f Pavement Structures

Table D.2. Axle Load Equivalency Factors For Flexible Pavements, Tandem Axles an d pt of 2.0
Pavement S tructural N um ber (SN)
* 1A>UU
kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000

4 0003 0003 0003 0002 0002 0002
6 001 001 001 001 001 001
8 003 003 003 003 003 002
10 007 008 008 007 006 006
12 013 016 016 014 013 012
14 024 029 029 026 024 023
16 041 048 050 046 042 040
18 066 O il 081 075 069 066
20 103 117 124 117 109 105
22 156 171 183 174 164 158
24 227 244 260 252 239 231
26 322 340 360 353 338 329
28 447 465 487 481 466 455
30 607 623 646 643 627 617
32 810 823 843 842 829 819
34 1 06 1 07 1 08 1 08 1 08 1 07
36 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38
38 1 76 1 75 1 73 1 72 1 73 1 74
40 2 22 2 19 2 15 2 13 2 16 2 18
42 2 77 2 73 2 64 2 62 2 66 2 70
44 3 42 3 36 3 23 3 18 3 24 3 31
46 4 20 4 11 3 92 3 83 3 91 4 02
48 5 10 4 98 4 72 4 58 4 68 4 83
50 6 15 5 99 5 64 5 44 5 56 5 77
52 7 37 7 16 6 71 6 43 6 56 6 83
54 8 77 8 51 7 93 7 55 7 69 8 03
56 10 4 10 1 9 3 8 8 90 94
58 12 2 11 8 10 9 10 3 10 4 10 9
60 14 3 13 8 12 7 11 9 12 0 12 6
62 16 6 16 0 14 7 13 7 13 8 14 5
64 19 3 18 6 17 0 15 8 15 8 16 6
66 22 2 21 4 19 6 18 0 18 0 18 9
68 25 5 24 6 22 4 20 6 20 5 21 5
70 29 2 28 1 25 6 23 4 23 2 24 3
72 33 3 32 0 29 1 26 5 26 2 27 4
74 37 8 36 4 33 0 30 0 29 4 30 8
76 42 8 41 2 37 3 33 8 33 1 34 5
78 48 4 46 5 42 0 38 0 37 0 38 6
80 54 4 52 3 47 2 42 5 41 3 43 0
82 61 1 58 7 52 9 47 6 46 0 47 8
84 68 4 65 7 59 2 53 0 51 2 53 0
86 76 3 73 3 66 0 59 0 56 8 58 6
88 85 0 81 6 73 4 65 5 62 8 64 7
90 94 4 90 6 81 5 72 6 69 4 71 3
Appendix D D-5

Table D.3. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements, Triple Axles and pt of 2.0
Pavement S tructural N um ber (SN)
Axle Load
(kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000
4 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001
6 0004 0004 0003 0003 0003 0003
8 0009 0010 0009 0008 0007 0007
10 002 002 002 002 002 001
12 004 .004 004 003 003 003
14 006 007 007 006 006 005
16 010 012 012 010 009 009
18 016 019 019 017 015 015
20 024 029 029 026 024 023
22 .034 .042 042 038 035 034
24 049 058 060 055 051 048
26 068 080 083 077 071 068
28 093 107 113 105 098 094
30 125 .140 149 140 131 126
32 164 182 194 184 173 167
34 213 233 248 238 225 217
36 273 294 313 303 288 279
38 346 368 390 381 364 353
40 434 456 481 473 454 443
42 538 560 587 580 561 548
44 662 682 710 705 686 673
46 807 825 852 849 831 818
48 976 992 1 015 1 014 999 987
50 1 17 1 18 1 20 1 20 1 19 1 18
52 1 40 1 40 1 42 1 42 1 41 1 40
54 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66
56 1 95 1 95 1 93 1 93 1 94 1 94
58 2 29 2 27 2 24 2 23 2 25 2 27
60 2 67 2.64 2 59 2 57 2 60 2 63
62 3 10 3 06 2 98 2 95 2 99 3 04
64 3 59 3 53 3 41 3 37 3 42 3 49
66 4 13 4 05 3 89 3 83 3 90 3 99
68 4 73 4 63 4 43 4 34 4 42 4 54
70 5 40 5 28 5 03 4 90 5 00 5 15
72 6 15 6 00 5 68 5 52 5 63 5 82
74 6 97 6 79 6 41 6 20 6 33 6 56
76 7 88 7 67 7 21 6 94 7 08 7 36
78 8 88 8.63 8 09 7 75 7 90 8 23
80 9 98 9 69 9 05 8 63 8 79 9 18
82 11 2 10 8 10 1 96 9 8 10 2
84 12 5 12.1 11 2 10 6 10 8 11 3
86 13 9 13.5 12 5 11 8 11 9 12 5
88 15 5 15.0 13 8 13 0 13 2 13 8
90 17 2 16 6 15 3 14 3 14 5 15 2
D-6 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table D .4. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements, Single Axles and pt of 2.5
Pavement S tructural N um ber (SN)
Axle Load
(kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 0004 0004 0003 0002 0002 0002
4 003 004 004 003 002 002
6 011 017 017 013 010 009
8 032 047 051 041 034 031
10 078 102 118 102 088 080
12 168 198 229 .213 189 176
14 328 358 399 388 360 342
16 591 613 646 645 623 606
18 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00
20 1 61 1 57 1 49 1 47 1 51 1 55
22 2 48 2 38 2 17 2 09 2 18 2 30
24 3 69 3 49 3 09 2 89 3 03 3 27
26 5 33 4 99 4 31 3 91 4 09 4 48
28 7 49 6 98 5 90 5 21 5 39 5 98
30 10 3 9 5 79 6 8 70 7 8
32 13 9 12 8 10 5 88 89 10 0
34 18 4 16 9 13 7 11 3 11 2 12 5
36 24 0 22 0 17 7 14 4 13 9 15 5
38 30 9 28 3 22 6 18 1 17 2 19 0
40 39 3 35 9 28 5 22 5 21 1 23 0
42 49 3 45 0 35 6 27 8 25 6 27 7
44 61 3 55 9 44 0 34 0 31 0 33 1
46 75 5 68 8 54 0 41 4 37 2 39 3
48 92 2 83 9 65 7 50 1 44 5 46 5
50 112 102 79 60 53 55
Appendix D D-7

Table D.5. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements, Tandem Axles an d pt of 2.5
. , T . Pavement Structural Number (SN)
Axle Load — ----------------------
(kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 0001 0001 0001 0000 0000 0000
4 0005 0005 0004 0003 0003 0002
6 002 002 002 001 001 001
8 004 006 005 004 003 003
10 008 013 011 009 007 006
12 015 024 023 018 014 013
14 026 041 042 033 027 024
16 044 065 070 057 047 043
18 070 097 109 092 077 070
20 107 141 162 141 121 110
22 160 198 229 207 180 166
24 231 273 315 292 260 242
26 327 370 420 401 364 342
28 451 493 548 534 495 470
30 611 648 703 695 658 633
32 813 843 889 887 857 834
34 1 06 1 08 1 11 1 11 1 09 1 08
36 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38
38 1 75 1 73 1 69 1 68 1 70 1 73
40 2 21 2 16 2 06 2 03 2 08 2 14
42 2 76 2 67 2 49 2 43 2 51 2 61
44 3 41 3 27 2 99 2 88 3 00 3 16
46 4 18 3 98 3 58 3 40 3 55 3 79
48 5 08 4 80 4 25 3 98 4 17 4 49
50 6 12 5 76 5 03 4 64 4 86 5 28
52 7 33 6 87 5 93 5 38 5 63 6 17
54 8 72 8 14 6 95 6 22 6 47 i 15
56 10 3 96 8 1 72 74 82
58 12 1 11 3 94 82 84 94
60 14 2 13 1 10 9 94 9 6 10 7
62 16 5 15 3 12 6 10 7 10 8 12 1
64 19 1 17 6 14 5 12 2 12 2 13 7
66 22 1 20 3 16 6 13 8 13 7 15 4
68 25 3 23 3 18 9 15 6 15 4 17 2
70 29 0 26 6 21 5 17 6 17 2 19 2
72 33 0 30 3 24 4 19 8 19 2 21 3
74 37 5 34 4 27 6 22 2 21 3 23 6
76 42 5 38 9 31 1 24 8 23 7 26 1
78 48 0 43 9 35 0 27 8 26 2 28 8
80 54 0 49 4 39 2 30 9 29 0 31 7
82 60 6 55 4 43 9 34 4 32 0 34 8
84 67 8 61 9 49 0 38 2 35 3 38 1
86 75 7 69 1 54 5 42 3 38 8 41 7
88 84 3 76 9 60 6 46 8 42 6 45 6
90 93 7 85 4 67 1 51 7 46 8 49 7
D_g Design o f Pavement Structures

Table D.6. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements, Triple Axles and pt of 2.5
Pavement Structural Number (SN)
Axle Load
(kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000

4 0002 0002 0002 0001 0001 0001
6 0006 0007 0005 0004 0003 0003
8 .001 002 001 001 001 001
10 .003 004 .003 002 002 002
12 005 007 006 004 003 003
14 008 012 010 008 006 006
16 012 019 .018 013 011 010
18 018 029 028 021 017 016
20 .027 .042 042 032 027 024
22 038 058 060 048 040 036
24 053 078 084 068 057 051
26 072 103 114 095 080 072
28 098 133 151 128 109 099
30 129 169 195 170 145 133
32 169 213 .247 220 191 175
34 219 266 308 281 246 228
36 279 329 379 352 313 292
38 352 403 461 436 393 368
40 439 491 554 533 487 459
42 543 594 661 644 597 567
44 666 714 781 769 723 692
46 811 854 918 911 868 838
48 979 1 015 1 072 1 069 1 033 1 005
50 1 17 1 20 1 24 1 25 1 22 1 20
52 1 40 1 41 1 44 1 44 1 43 1 41
54 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66
56 1 95 1 93 1 90 1 90 1 91 1 93
58 2 29 2 25 2 17 2 16 2 20 2 24
60 2 67 2 60 2 48 2 44 2 51 2 58
62 3 09 3 00 2 82 2 76 2 85 2 95
64 3 57 3 44 3 19 3 10 3 22 3 36
66 4 11 3 94 3 61 3 47 3 62 3 81
68 4 71 4 49 4 06 3 88 4 05 4 30
70 5 38 5 11 4 57 4 32 4 52 4 84
72 6 12 5 79 5 13 4 80 5 03 5 41
74 6 93 6 54 5.74 5 32 5 57 6 04
76 7 84 7 37 6 41 5 88 6 15 6 71
78 8 83 8 28 7 14 6 49 6 78 7 43
80 9 92 9 28 7 95 7 15 7 45 8 21
82 11 1 10 4 88 7 9 82 90
84 12 4 11 6 9 8 86 89 99
86 13 8 12 9 10 8 9.5 9 8 10 9
88 15 4 14 3 11 9 10 4 10 6 11 9
90 17 1 15 8 13.2 11 3 11 6 12 9
Appendix D

Table D.7. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements, Single Axles and pt of 3.0
. , _ . Pavement Structural Number (SN)
kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 0008 0009 0006 0003 0002 0002

4 004 008 006 004 002 002
6 014 030 028 018 012 010
8 035 .070 080 055 040 034
10 082 .132 168 132 101 086
12 173 231 296 260 212 187
14 332 388 468 447 391 358
16 594 633 695 693 651 622
18 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00
20 1 60 1 53 1 41 1 38 1 44 1 51
22 2 47 2 29 1 96 1 83 1 97 2 16
24 3 67 3 33 2 69 2 39 2 60 2 96
26 5 29 4 72 3 65 3 08 3 33 3 91
28 7 43 6 56 4 88 3 93 4 17 5 00
30 10 2 89 6 5 50 5 1 6 3
32 13 8 12 0 84 62 6 3 77
34 18 2 15 7 10 9 7 8 7 6 9 3
36 23 8 20 4 14 0 9 7 9 1 11 0
38 30 6 26 2 17 7 11 9 11 0 13 0
40 38 8 33 2 22 2 14 6 13 1 15 3
42 48 8 41 6 27 6 17 8 15 5 17 8
44 60 6 51 6 34 0 21 6 18 4 20 6
46 74 7 63 4 41 5 26 1 21 6 23 8
48 91 2 77 3 50 3 31 3 25 4 27 4
50 110 94 61 37 30 32
 Design o f Pavement Structures

Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements, Tandem Axles and pt of 3.0
Pavement Structural Number (SN)
dps 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 0002 0002 0001 0001 0000 0000

4 001 001 001 000 000 000
6 003 004 003 002 001 001
8 006 011 009 005 003 003
10 Oil 024 020 012 008 007
12 019 042 039 024 017 014
14 031 066 068 045 032 026
16 049 096 109 076 055 046
18 075 134 164 121 090 076
20 113 181 232 182 139 119
22 166 241 313 260 205 178
24 238 317 407 358 292 257
26 333 413 517 476 402 360
28 457 534 643 614 538 492
30 616 684 788 773 702 656
32 817 870 956 953 896 855
34 1 07 1 10 1 15 1 15 1 12 1 09
36 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38 1 38
38 1 75 1 71 1 64 1 62 1 66 1 70
40 2 21 2 11 1 94 1 89 1 98 2 08
42 2 75 2 59 2 29 2 19 2 33 2 50
44 3 39 3 15 2 70 2 52 2 71 2 97
46 4 15 3 81 3 16 2 89 3 13 3 50
48 5 04 4 58 3 70 3 29 3 57 4 07
50 6 08 5 47 4 31 3 74 4 05 4 70
52 7 27 6 49 5 01 4 24 4 57 5 37
54 8 65 7 67 5 81 4 79 5 13 6 10
56 10 2 90 67 54 57 6 9
58 12 0 10 6 7 7 6 1 64 7 7
60 14 1 12 3 89 6 8 7 1 86
62 16 3 14 2 10 2 77 7 8 9 5
64 18 9 16 4 11 6 86 86 10 5
66 21 8 18 9 13 2 9 6 9 5 11 6
68 25 1 21 7 15 0 10 7 10 5 12 7
70 28 7 24 7 17 0 12 0 11 5 13 9
72 32 7 28 1 19 2 13 3 12 6 15 2
74 37 2 31 9 21 6 14 8 13 8 16 5
76 42 1 36 0 24 3 16 4 15 1 17 9
78 47 5 40 6 27 3 18 2 16 5 19 4
80 53 4 45 7 30 5 20 1 18 0 21 0
82 60 0 51 2 34 0 22 2 19 6 22 7
84 67 1 57 2 37 9 24 6 21 3 24 5
74 9 63 8 42 1 27 1 23 2 26 4
83 4 71 0 46 7 29 8 25 2 28 4
92 7 78 8 51 7 32 7 27 4 30 5
Appendix D D-l 1

Table D.9. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements, Triple Axles and pt of 3.0
Pavement S tructural N um ber (SN)
kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 0001 0001 0001 0000 0000 0000

4 0005 0004 0003 0002 0001 0001
6 001 001 001 001 000 000
8 003 004 002 001 001 001
10 005 008 005 003 002 002
12 007 014 010 006 004 003
14 Oil 023 018 011 007 006
16 016 035 030 018 013 010
18 022 050 047 029 020 017
20 031 069 069 044 031 026
22 043 090 097 065 046 039
24 059 116 132 092 066 056
26 079 145 174 126 092 078
28 104 179 223 168 126 107
30 136 218 279 219 167 143
32 176 265 342 279 218 188
34 226 319 413 350 279 243
36 286 382 491 432 352 310
38 359 456 577 524 437 389
40 447 543 671 626 536 483
42 550 643 775 740 649 593
44 673 760 889 865 777 720
46 817 894 1 014 1 001 920 865
48 984 1 048 1 152 1 148 1 080 1 030
50 1 18 1 23 1 30 1 31 1 26 1 22
52 1 40 1 43 1 47 1 48 1 45 1 43
54 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66 1 66
56 1 95 1 92 1 86 1 85 1 88 1 91
58 2 28 2 21 2 09 2 06 2 13 2 20
60 2 66 2 54 2 34 2 28 2 39 2 50
62 3 08 2 92 2 61 2 52 2 66 2 84
64 3 56 3 33 2 92 2 77 2 96 3 19
66 4 09 3 79 3 25 3 04 3 27 3 58
68 4 68 4 31 3 62 3 33 3 60 4 00
70 5 34 4 88 4 02 3 64 3 94 4 44
72 6 08 5 51 4 46 3 97 4 31 4 91
74 6 89 6 21 4 94 4 32 4 69 5 40
76 7 78 6 98 5 47 4 70 5 09 5 93
78 8 76 7 83 6 04 5 11 5 51 6 48
80 9 84 8 75 6 67 5 54 5 96 7 06
82 11 0 9 8 74 60 64 7 7
84 12 3 10 9 8 1 65 6 9 83
86 13 7 12 1 89 70 74 90
88 15 3 13 4 9 8 7 6 80 9 6
90 16 9 14 8 10 7 82 85 10 4
 Design o f Pavement Structures

Tbble D.10. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Single Axles and pt of 2.0

Slab Thickness, D (inches)

Load -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

2 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002

4 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
6 011 010 010 010 010 010 010 010 010
8 035 033 032 032 032 032 032 032 032
10 087 084 082 081 080 080 080 080 080
12 186 180 176 175 174 174 173 173 173
14 353 346 341 338 337 336 336 336 336
16 .614 609 604 601 599 599 598 598 598
18 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00
20 1 55 1 56 1 57 1 58 1 58 1 59 1 59 1 59 1 59
22 2 32 2 32 2 35 2 38 2 40 2 41 2 41 2 41 2 42
24 3 37 3 34 3 40 3 47 3 51 3 53 3 54 3 55 3 55
26 4 76 4 69 4 77 4 88 4 97 5.02 5 04 5 06 5 06
28 6 58 6 44 6 52 6 70 6 85 6 94 7 00 7 02 7 04
30 8 92 8 68 8 74 8 98 9 23 9 39 9 48 9 54 9 56
32 11 9 11.5 11 5 11 8 12 2 12 4 12 6 12 7 12 7
34 15 5 15 0 14 9 15 3 15 8 16 2 16 4 16 6 16 7
36 20 1 19 3 19 2 19 5 20 1 20 7 21 1 21 4 21 5
38 25 6 24 5 24 3 24 6 25 4 26 1 26 7 27 1 27 4
40 32 2 30 8 30 4 30 7 31 6 32 6 33 4 34 0 34 4
42 40 1 38 4 37 7 38 0 38 9 40 1 41 3 42 1 42 7
44 49 4 47 3 46 4 46 6 47 6 49 0 50 4 51 6 52 4
46 60 4 57 7 56 6 56 7 57 7 59 3 61 1 62 6 63 7
48 73 2 69 9 68 4 68 4 69 4 71 2 73 3 75 3 76 8
50 88 0 84 1 82 2 82 0 83 0 84 9 87 4 89 8 91 7
Appendix D D-13

Table D . l l . Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Tandem Axles and pt of 2.0

Slab Thickness, D (inches)

kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
2 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001
4 0006 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005
6 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
8 006 006 005 005 005 005 005 005 005
10 014 013 013 012 012 012 012 012 012
12 028 026 026 025 025 025 025 025 025
14 051 049 048 047 047 047 047 047 047
16 087 084 082 081 081 080 080 080 080
18 141 136 133 132 131 131 131 131 131
20 216 210 206 204 203 203 203 203 203
22 319 313 307 305 304 303 303 303 303
24 454 449 444 441 440 439 439 439 439
26 629 626 622 620 618 618 618 618 618
28 852 851 850 850 850 849 849 849 849
30 1 13 1 13 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14
32 1 48 1 48 1 49 1 50 1 51 1 51 1 51 1 51 1 51
34 1 90 1 90 1 93 1 95 1 96 1 97 1 97 1 97 1 97
36 2 42 2 41 2 45 2 49 2 51 2 52 2 53 2 53 2 53
38 3 04 3 02 3 07 3 13 3 17 3 19 3 20 3 20 3 21
40 3 79 3 74 3 80 3 89 3 95 3 98 4 00 4 01 4 01
42 4 67 4 59 4 66 4 78 4 87 4 93 4 95 4 97 4 97
44 5 72 5 59 5 67 5 82 5 95 6 03 6 07 6 09 6 10
46 6 94 6 76 6 83 7 02 7 20 7 31 7 37 7 41 7 43
48 8 36 8 12 8 17 8 40 8 63 8 79 8 88 8 93 8 96
50 10 00 9 69 9 72 9 98 10 27 10 49 10 62 10 69 10 73
52 11 9 11 5 11 5 11 8 12 1 12 4 12 6 12 7 12 8
54 14 0 13 5 13 5 13 8 14 2 14 6 14 9 15 0 15 1
56 16 5 15 9 15 8 16 1 16 6 17 1 17 4 17 6 17 7
58 19 3 18 5 18 4 18 7 19 3 19 8 20 3 20 5 20 7
60 22 4 21 5 21 3 21 6 22 3 22 9 23 5 23 8 24 0
62 25 9 24 9 24 6 24 9 25 6 26 4 27 0 27 5 27 7
64 29 9 28 6 28 2 28 5 29.3 30 2 31 0 31 6 31 9
66 34 3 32 8 32 3 32 6 33 4 34 4 35 4 36 1 36 5
68 39 2 37 5 36 8 37 1 37 9 39 1 40 2 41 1 41 6
70 44 6 42 7 41 9 42 1 42 9 44 2 45 5 46 6 47 3
72 50 6 48 4 47 5 47 6 48.5 49 9 51 4 52 6 53 5
74 57 3 54 7 53 6 53 6 54 6 56 1 57 7 59 2 60 3
76 64 6 61 7 60 4 60 3 61 2 62 8 64 7 66 4 67 7
78 72 5 69 3 67 8 67 7 68 6 70 2 72 3 74 3 75 8
80 81 3 77 6 75 9 75 7 76 6 78 3 80 6 82 8 84 7
82 90 9 86 7 84 7 84 4 85 3 87 1 89 6 92 1 94 2
84 101 97 94 94 95 97 99 102 105
86 113 107 105 104 105 107 110 113 116
88 125 119 116 116 116 118 121 125 128
90 138 132 129 128 129 131 134 137 141
£).]4 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table D.12. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Triple Axles and p, of 2.0

Axle
Slab Thickness, D (inches)
Load
(kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

2 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001

4 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003
6 0010 0009 0009 0009 0009 0009 0009 0009 0009
8 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
10 005 005 005 005 005 005 005 005 005
12 010 010 009 009 009 009 009 009 009
14 018 017 017 016 016 016 016 016 016
16 030 029 028 027 027 027 027 027 027
18 047 045 044 044 043 043 043 043 043
20 072 069 067 066 066 066 066 066 066
22 105 101 099 098 097 097 097 097 097
24 149 144 141 139 139 138 138 138 138
26 205 199 195 194 193 192 192 192 192
28 276 270 265 263 262 262 262 262 261
30 364 359 354 351 350 349 349 349 349
32 472 468 463 460 459 458 458 458 458
34 603 600 596 594 593 592 592 592 592
36 759 758 757 756 755 755 755 755 755
38 946 947 949 950 951 951 951 951 951
40 1 17 1 17 1 18 1 18 1 18 1 18 1 18 1 18 1 19
42 1 42 1 43 1 44 1 45 1 46 1 46 1 46 1 46 1 46
44 1 73 1 73 1 75 1 77 1 78 1 78 1 79 1 79 1 79
46 2 08 2 07 2 10 2 13 2 15 2 16 2 16 2 16 2 17
48 2 48 2 47 2 51 2 55 2 58 2 59 2 60 2 60 2 61
50 2 95 2 92 2 97 3 03 3 07 3 09 3 10 3 11 3 11
52 3 48 3 44 3 50 3 58 3 63 3 66 3 68 3 69 3 69
54 4 09 4 03 4 09 4 20 4 27 4 31 4 33 4 35 4 35
56 4 78 4 69 4 76 4 89 4 99 5 05 5 08 5 09 5 10
58 5 57 5 44 5 51 5 66 5 79 5 87 5 91 5 94 5 95
60 6 45 6 29 6 35 6 53 6 69 6 79 6 85 6 88 6 90
62 7 43 7 23 7 28 7 49 7 69 7 82 7 90 7 94 7 97
64 8 54 8 28 8 32 8 55 8 80 8 97 9 07 9 13 9 16
66 9 76 9 46 9 48 9 73 10 02 10 24 10 37 10 44 10 48
68 11 1 10 8 10 8 11 0 11 4 11 6 11 8 11 9 12 0
70 12 6 12 2 12 2 12 5 12 8 13 2 13 4 13 5 13 6
72 14 3 13 8 13 7 14 0 14 5 14 9 15 1 15 3 15 4
74 16 1 15 5 15 4 15 16 2 16 7 17 0 17 2 17 3
76 18 2 17 5 17 3 17 6 18 2 18 7 19 1 19 3 19 5
78 20 4 19 6 19 4 19 7 20 3 20 9 21 4 21 7 21 8
80 22 8 21 9 21 6 21 9 22 6 23 3 23 8 24 2 24 4
82 25 4 24 4 24 1 24 4 25 0 25 8 26 5 26 9 27 2
84 28 3 27 1 26 7 27 0 27 7 28 6 29 4 29 9 30 2
86 31 4 30 1 29 6 29 9 30 7 31 6 32 5 33 1 33 5
88 34 8 33 3 32 8 33 0 33 8 34 8 35 8 36 6 37 1
90 38 5 36 8 36 2 36 4 37 2 38 3 39 4 40 3 40 9
Appendix D

Table D.13. Axle L oad Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Single Axles an d p t of 2.5

. Slab Thickness, D (inches)

Load ----------------------- -— — ------------------------------------------------------
(kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

2 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 00^

4 003 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
6 012 011 010 010 010 010 010 010 010
8 039 035 033 032 032 032 032 032 032
10 097 089 084 082 081 080 080 080 080
12 203 189 181 176 175 174 174 173 173
14 376 360 347 341 338 337 336 336 336
16 634 623 610 604 601 599 599 599 598
18 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00
20 1 51 1 52 1 55 1 57 1 58 1 58 1 59 1 59 1 59
22 2 21 2 20 2 28 2 34 2 38 2 40 2 41 2 41 2 41
24 3 16 3 10 3 22 3 36 3 45 3 50 3 53 3 54 3 55
26 4 41 4 26 4 42 4 67 4 85 4 95 5 01 5 04 5 05
28 6 05 5 76 5 92 6 29 6 61 6 81 6 92 6 98 7 01
30 8 16 7 67 7 79 8 28 8 79 9 14 9 35 9 46 9 52
32 10 8 10 1 10 1 10 7 11 4 12 0 12 3 12 6 12 7
34 14 1 13 0 12 9 13 6 14 6 15 4 16 0 16 4 16 5
36 18 2 16 7 16 4 17 1 18 3 19 5 20 4 21 0 21 3
38 23 1 21 1 20 6 21 3 22 7 24 3 25 6 26 4 27 0
40 29 1 26 5 25 7 26 3 27 9 29 9 31 6 32 9 33 7
42 36 2 32 9 31 7 32 2 34 0 36 3 38 7 40 4 41 6
44 44 6 40 4 38 8 39 2 41 0 43 8 46 7 49 1 50 8
46 54 5 49 3 47 1 47 3 49 2 52 3 55 9 59 0 61 4
48 66 1 59 7 56 9 56 8 58 7 62 1 66 3 70 3 73 4
50 79 4 71 7 68 2 67 8 69 6 73 3 78 1 83 0 87 1
D-16 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table D.14. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Tandem Axles and pt of 2.5
Axle
Slab Thickness, D (inches)
Load
(kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
2 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001
4 0006 0006 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005
6 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
8 007 006 006 005 005 005 005 005 005
10 015 014 013 013 012 012 012 012 012
12 031 028 026 026 025 025 025 025 025
14 057 052 049 048 047 047 047 047 047
16 097 089 084 082 081 081 080 080 080
18 155 143 136 133 132 131 131 131 131
20 234 220 211 206 204 203 203 203 203
22 340 325 313 308 305 304 303 303 303
24 475 462 450 444 441 440 439 439 439
26 644 637 627 622 620 619 618 618 618
28 855 854 852 850 850 850 849 849 849
30 1 11 1 12 1 13 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14
32 1 43 1 44 1 47 1 49 1 50 1 51 1 51 1 51 1 51
34 1 82 1 82 1 87 1 92 1 95 1 96 1 97 1 97 1 97
36 2 29 2 27 2 35 2 43 2 48 2 51 2 52 2 52 2 53
38 2 85 2 80 2 91 3 03 3 12 3 16 3 18 3 20 3 20
40 3 52 3 42 3 55 3 74 3 87 3 94 3 98 4 00 4 01
42 4 32 4 16 4 30 4 55 4 74 4 86 4 91 4 95 4 96
44 5 26 5 01 5 16 5 48 5 75 5 92 6 01 6 06 6 09
46 6 36 6 01 6 14 6 53 6 90 7 14 7 28 7 36 7 40
48 7 64 7 16 7 27 7 73 8 21 8 55 8 75 8 86 8 92
50 9 11 8 50 8 55 9 07 9 68 10 14 10 42 10 58 10 66
52 10 8 10 0 10 0 10 6 11.3 11 9 12 3 12 5 12 7
54 12 8 11 8 11 7 12 3 13 2 13 9 14 5 14 8 14 9
56 15 0 13 8 13 6 14 2 15 2 16 2 16 8 17 3 17 5
58 17 5 16 0 15 7 16 3 17 5 18 6 19 5 20 1 20 4
60 20 3 18 5 18 1 18 7 20 0 21 4 22 5 23 2 23 6
62 23 5 21 4 20 8 21 4 22 8 24 4 25 7 26 7 27 3
64 27 0 24 6 23 8 24 4 25 8 27 7 29 3 30 5 31 3
66 31 0 28 1 27 1 27 6 29 2 31 3 33 2 34 7 35 7
68 35 4 32 1 30 9 31 3 32 9 35 2 37 5 39 3 40 5
70 40 3 36 5 35 0 35 3 37 0 39 5 42 1 44 3 45 9
72 45 7 41 4 39 6 39 8 41 5 44 2 47 2 49 8 51 7
74 51 7 46 7 44 6 44 7 46 4 49 3 52 7 55 7 58 0
76 58 3 52 6 50 2 50 1 51 8 54 9 58 6 62 1 64 8
78 65 5 59 1 56 3 56 1 57 7 60 9 65 0 69 0 72 3
80 73 4 66 2 62 9 62 5 64 2 67 5 71 9 76 4 80 2
82 82 0 73 9 70 2 69 6 71 2 74 7 79 4 84 4 88 8
84 91 4 82 4 78 1 77 3 78 9 82 4 87 4 93 0 98 1
86 102 92 87 86 87 91 96 102 108
88 113 102 96 95 96 100 105 112 119
90 125 112 106 105 106 110 115 123 130
Appendix D D -l 7

Table D.15. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Triple Axles and pt of 2.5

T . Slab Thickness, D (inches)

Load --------------------------------------------------------------------- ’---- ----------
kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

2 0001 0001 0001 .0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001

4 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003
6 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001
8 003 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
10 006 005 005 .005 005 005 .005 005 005
12 011 010 010 009 009 009 009 009 009
14 020 018 017 017 016 016 016 016 016
16 033 030 029 028 027 027 027 027 027
18 053 048 045 044 044 043 043 043 043
20 080 073 069 067 066 066 066 066 066
22 116 107 101 099 098 097 097 097 097
24 163 151 144 141 139 139 138 138 138
26 222 209 200 195 194 193 192 192 192
28 295 281 271 265 263 262 262 262 262
30 384 371 359 354 351 350 349 349 349
32 490 480 468 463 460 459 458 458 458
34 616 609 601 596 594 593 592 592 592
36 765 762 759 757 756 755 755 755 755
38 939 941 946 948 950 951 951 951 951
40 1 14 1 15 1 16 1 17 1 18 1 18 1 18 1 18 1 18
42 1 38 1 38 1 41 1 44 1 45 1 46 1 46 1 46 1 46
44 1 65 1 65 1 70 1 74 1 77 1 78 1 78 1 78 1 79
46 1 97 1 96 2 03 2 09 2 13 2 15 2 16 2 16 2 16
48 2 34 2 31 2 40 2 49 2 55 2 58 2 59 2 60 2 60
50 2 76 2 71 2 81 2 94 3 02 3 07 3 09 3 10 3 11
52 3 24 3 15 3 27 3 44 3 56 3 62 3 66 3 68 3 68
54 3 79 3 66 3 79 4 00 4 16 4 26 4 30 4 33 4 34
56 4 41 4 23 4 37 4 63 4 84 4 97 5 03 5 07 5 09
58 5 12 4 87 5 00 5 32 5 59 5 76 5 85 5 90 5 93
60 5 91 5 59 5 71 6 08 6 42 6 64 6 77 6 84 6 87
62 6 80 6 39 6 50 6 91 7 33 7 62 7 79 7 88 7 93
64 7 79 7 29 7 37 7 82 8 33 8 70 8 92 9 04 9 11
66 8 90 8 28 8 33 8 83 9 42 9 88 10 17 10 33 10 42
68 10 1 94 94 99 10 6 11 2 11 5 11 7 11 9
70 11 5 10 6 10 6 11 1 11 9 12 6 13 0 13 3 13 5
72 13 0 12 0 11 8 12 4 13 3 14 1 14 7 15 0 15 2
74 14 6 13 5 13 2 13 8 14 8 15 8 16 5 16 9 17 1
76 16 5 15 1 14 8 15 4 16 5 17 6 18 4 18 9 19 2
78 18 5 16 9 16 5 17 1 18 2 19 5 20 5 21 1 21 5
80 20 6 18 8 18 3 18 9 20 2 21 6 22 7 23 5 24 0
82 23 0 21 0 20 3 20 9 22 2 23 8 25 2 26 1 26 7
84 25 6 23 3 22 5 23 1 24 5 26 2 27 8 28 9 29 6
86 28 4 25 8 24 9 25 4 26 9 28 8 30 5 31 9 32 8
88 31 5 28 6 27 5 27 9 29 4 31 5 33 5 35 1 36 1
90 34 8 31 5 30 3 30 7 32 2 34 4 36 7 38 5 39 8
 Design o f Pavement Structures

Thhle D .16. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Single Axles and pt of 3.0

Slab Thickness, D (inches)

ju a u
12 13 14
kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11

2 0003 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002 0002

4 003 003 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
6 014 012 O il 010 010 010 010 010 010
8 045 038 034 033 032 032 032 032 032
10 111 095 087 083 081 081 080 080 080
12 228 202 186 179 176 174 174 174 173
14 408 378 355 344 340 337 337 .336 336
16 660 640 619 608 603 600 599 599 599
18 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00
20 1 46 1.47 1 52 1 55 1 57 1 58 1 58 1 59 1 59
22 2 07 2 06 2 18 2 29 2 35 2 38 2 40 2 41 2 41
24 2.90 2 81 3 00 3 23 3 38 3 47 3 51 3 53 3 54
26 4 00 3 77 4 01 4 40 4 70 4 87 4 96 5 01 5 04
28 5 43 4 99 5 23 5 80 6 31 6 65 6 83 6 93 6 98
30 7 27 6 53 6 72 7 46 8 25 8 83 9 17 9 36 9 46
32 9 59 8 47 8 53 9 42 10 54 11 44 12 03 12 37 12 56
34 12 5 10 9 10 7 11 7 13 2 14 5 15 5 16 0 16 4
36 16 0 13 8 13 4 14 4 16 2 18 1 19 5 20 4 21 0
38 20 4 17 4 16 7 17 7 19 8 22 2 24 2 25 6 26 4
40 25 6 21 8 20 6 21 5 23 8 26 8 29 5 31 5 32 9
42 31 8 26 9 25 3 26 0 28 5 32 0 35 5 38 4 40 3
44 39 2 33 1 30 8 31 3 33 9 37 9 42 3 46 1 48 8
46 47 8 40 3 37 2 37 5 40 1 44 5 49 8 54 7 58 5
48 57 9 48 6 44 8 44 7 47 3 52 1 58 2 64 3 69 4
50 69 6 58 4 53 6 53 1 55 6 60 6 67 6 75 0 81 4
Appendix D D-l 9

Table D.17. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Tandem Axles and pt of 3.0
Axle
Slab Thickness, D (inches)
Load
(kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
2 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001
4 0007 0006 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005 0005
6 003 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
8 008 006 006 006 005 005 005 005 005
10 018 015 013 013 013 012 012 012 012
12 036 030 027 026 026 025 025 025 025
14 066 056 050 048 047 047 047 047 047
16 111 095 087 083 081 081 081 080 080
18 174 153 140 135 132 131 131 131 131
20 260 234 217 209 205 204 203 203 203
22 368 341 321 311 307 305 304 303 303
24 502 479 458 447 443 440 440 439 439
26 664 651 634 625 621 619 618 618 618
28 859 857 853 851 850 850 850 849 849
30 1 09 1 10 1 12 1 13 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14 1 14
32 1 38 1 38 1 44 1 47 1 49 1 50 1 51 1 51 1 51
34 1 72 1 71 1 80 1 88 1 93 1 95 1 96 1 97 1 97
36 2 13 2 10 2 23 2 36 2 45 2 49 2 51 2 52 2 52
38 2 62 2 54 2 71 2 92 3 06 3 13 3 17 3 19 3 20
40 3 21 3 05 3 26 3 55 3 76 3 89 3 95 3 98 4 00
42 3 90 3 65 3 87 4 26 4 58 4 77 4 87 4 92 4 95
44 4 72 4 35 4 57 5 06 5 50 5 78 5 94 6 02 6 06
46 5 68 5 16 5 36 5 95 6 54 6 94 7 17 7 29 7 36
48 6 80 6 10 6 25 6 93 7 69 8 24 8 57 8 76 8 86
50 8 09 7 17 7 26 8 03 8 96 9 70 10 17 10 43 10 58
52 9 57 8 41 8 40 9 24 10 36 11 32 11 96 12 33 12 54
54 11 3 9 8 97 10 6 11 9 13 1 14 0 14 5 14 8
56 13 2 11 4 11 2 12 1 13 6 15 1 16 2 16 9 17 3
58 15 4 13 2 12 8 13 7 15 4 17 2 18 6 19 5 20 1
60 17 9 15 3 14 7 15 6 17 4 19 5 21 3 22 5 23 2
62 20 6 17 6 16 8 17 6 19 6 22 0 24 1 25 7 26 6
64 23 7 20 2 19 1 19 9 22 0 24 7 27 3 29 2 30 4
66 27 2 23 1 21 7 22 4 24 6 27 6 30 6 33 0 34 6
68 31 1 26 3 24 6 25 2 27 4 30 8 34 3 37 1 39 2
70 35 4 29 8 27 8 28 2 30 6 34 2 38 2 41 6 44 1
72 40 1 33 8 31 3 31 6 34 0 37 9 42 3 46 4 49 4
74 45 3 38 1 35 2 35 4 37 7 41 8 46 8 51 5 55 2
76 51 1 42 9 39 5 39 5 41 8 46 1 51 5 56 9 61 3
78 57 4 48 2 44 3 44 0 46 3 50 7 56 6 62 7 67 9
80 64 3 53 9 49 4 48 9 51 1 55 8 62 1 68 9 74 9
82 71 8 60 2 55 1 54 3 56 5 61 2 67 9 75 5 82 4
84 80 0 67 0 61 2 60 2 62 2 67 0 74 2 82 4 90 3
86 89 0 74 5 67 9 66 5 68 5 73 4 80 8 89 8 98 7
88 98 7 82 5 75 2 73 5 75 3 80 2 88 0 97 7 107 5
90 109 91 83 81 83 88 96 106 117
jy-20 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table D.18. Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Rigid Pavements, Triple Axles and pt of 3.0

, Slab Thickness, D (inches)

Load --------------------- -- --------------------------------------------------------------
kips) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

2 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001

4 0004 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003 0003
6 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001
8 003 003 002 002 002 002 002 002 002
10 007 006 005 005 005 005 005 005 005
12 013 011 010 009 009 009 009 009 009
14 023 020 018 017 017 016 016 .016 016
16 039 033 030 028 028 027 027 027 027
18 061 052 047 045 044 044 043 043 043
20 091 078 071 068 067 066 066 066 066
22 132 114 104 100 098 097 097 097 097
24 183 161 148 143 140 139 139 138 138
26 246 221 205 198 195 193 193 192 192
28 322 296 277 268 265 263 262 262 262
30 411 387 367 357 353 351 350 349 349
32 515 495 476 466 462 460 459 458 458
34 634 622 607 599 595 594 593 592 592
36 772 768 762 758 756 756 755 755 755
38 930 934 942 947 949 950 951 951 951
40 1 11 1 12 1 15 1 17 1 18 1 18 1 18 1 18 1 18
42 1 32 1 33 1 38 1 42 1 44 1 45 1 46 1 46 1 46
44 1 56 1 56 1 64 1 71 1 75 1 77 1 78 1 78 1 78
46 1 84 1 83 1 94 2 04 2 10 2 14 2 15 2 16 2 16
48 2 16 2 12 2 26 2 41 2 51 2 56 2 58 2 59 2 60
50 2 53 2 45 2 61 2 82 2 96 3 03 3 07 3 09 3 10
52 2 95 2 82 3 01 3 27 3 47 3 58 3 63 3 66 3 68
54 3 43 3 23 3 43 3 77 4 03 4 18 4 27 4 31 4 33
56 3 98 3 70 3 90 4 31 4 65 4 86 4 98 5 04 5 07
58 4 59 4 22 4 42 4 90 5 34 5 62 5 78 5 86 5 90
60 5 28 4 80 4 99 5 54 6 08 6 45 6 66 6 78 6 84
62 6 06 5 45 5 61 6 23 6 89 7 36 7 64 7 80 7 88
64 6 92 6 18 6 29 6 98 7 76 8 36 8 72 8 93 9 04
66 7 89 6 98 7 05 7 78 8 70 9 44 9 91 10 18 10 33
68 8 96 7 88 7 87 8 66 9 71 10 61 11 20 11 55 11 75
70 10 2 89 88 96 10 8 11 9 12 6 13 1 13 3
72 11 5 10 0 9 8 10 6 12 0 13 2 14 1 14 7 15 0
74 12 9 11 2 10 9 11 7 13 2 14 7 15 8 16 5 16 9
76 14 5 12 5 12 1 12 9 14 5 16 2 17 5 18 4 18 9
78 16 2 13 9 13 4 14 2 15 9 17 8 19 4 20 5 21 1
80 18 2 15 5 14 8 15 6 17 4 19 6 21 4 22 7 23 5
82 20 2 17 2 16 4 17 2 19 1 21 4 23 5 25 1 26 1
84 22 5 19 1 18 1 18 8 20 8 23 4 25 8 27 6 28 8
86 25 0 21 2 19 9 20 6 22 6 25 5 28 2 30 4 31 8
88 27 6 23 4 21 9 22 5 24 6 27 7 30 7 33 2 35 0
90 30 5 25 8 24 1 24 6 26 8 30 0 33 4 36 3 38 3
Appendix D D-21

A xle Load Traffic Number A 1 8 Kip

Equivalency of E A L 's
Factor A xles

Single Axles P = 2 5,
SN = 5

Under 3,000 0 0002 X 0 0 000

3 ,0 0 0 - 6,999 0 0050 X 1 = 0 005
7 ,0 0 0 - 7,999 0 0320 X 6 = 0 192
8,000 - 11,999 0 0870 X 144 = 12 528
1 2 ,0 0 0 - 15,999 0 3600 X 16 = 5 760
26,000 - 29,999 5 3890 X 1 = 5 3890

Tandem Axle Groups

Under 6,000 0 0100 X 0 = 0 000

6 ,0 0 0 - 11,993 0 0100 X 14 = 0 140
1 2 ,0 0 0 - 17,999 0 0440 X 21 = 0 924
18,000 - 23,999 0 1480 X 44 = 6512
24,000 - 29,999 0 4260 X 42 = 17 892
30,000 - 32,000 0 7530 X 44 = 33 132
32,001 - 32,500 0 8850 X 21 = 18 585
32,501 - 33,999 1 0020 X 101 = 101 202
34,000 - 35,999 1 2300 X 43 = 52 890

18 Kip EA L's for all trucks wieghed —

255 151

18 Kip E A L's for all trucks weighed 255 151

Truck Load Factor = — .. . = _ _ _ _ _ _ = 1 5464
Number of trucks weighed 165 165

Figure D . l . C om putation of the T ruck Load Factor for 5 Axle or G reater Trucks on
Flexible Pavements with an SN = 5 and a Terminal Serviceability of 2.5
D-22 Design o f Pavement Structures

within the axle load intervals indicated The ESAL’s D.3 EXAM PLE ESAL CALCULATIONS
by axle load intervals is summed to give a total ESAL’s
for 165 trucks of this type which were weighed The In order to illustrate more specifically how this
truck load factor is found to be 1 5464 A similar set procedure works, a number of sample calculations
of calculations can be made for each truck classifica­ follow Table D 21 shows the calculations of 18-kip
tion included in the W-4 tables ESAL’s for a facility having traffic typical of a rural
It should be noted that this truck load factor was arterial Data for this example comes from the W-2
based on an assumed terminal serviceability of 2 5 and W-4 tables and are assumed to be representative of
and a structural number (SN) of 5 0 In most cases, the design facility In developing the Example 1 calcu­
such an assumption will provide information suffi­ lation, the following assumptions were made:
ciently accurate for design purposes When more ac­
(1) Traffic volumes (for all vehicle types) will in­
curacy is required, it will be necessary to recalculate
crease at a rate of 2 percent per year, com­
the truck load factor with the new equivalency factors
pounded annually (as previously noted, a poor
as previously discussed
assumption)
When information is not available directly from
(2) The axle weights of the various vehicle types
weigh station loadings, it is necessary to use rep­
will remain constant over the analysis period
resentative values for each of the various truck
(3) Terminal serviceability (pt) is 2 5
classifications No adjustments can be made for serv­
(4) Analysis period is 20 years; since stage con­
iceability or thicknesses using this alternate This
struction is not considered, the performance
method is likely to be the one used most often
period is also 20 years
The work sheet in Table D. 19 may be used to calcu­
(5) Slab thickness (D) is equal to 9 inches
late ESAL’s using truck load factors obtained directly
or based on representative values furnished by the de­ From the W-2 table, the number of passenger cars
sign agency (5,925) is entered in Column A, followed by the num­
The first column (A) represents the base year daily ber for buses (35) From the W-4 table, the total
volume counts of each vehicle type taken from data number of vehicles counted is used for the balance of
collected at classification count stations representative the Column A entries, using only the numbers for the
of the design location current year’s data For this example, 1,135 panel and
The second column (B) indicates the growth factor pickup trucks, 3 other two-axle/four-tire trucks, 372
assigned to each of the various vehicle types The two-axle/six-tire trucks, etc , have been entered to
calculations should take into account the fact that complete Column A
growth factors normally vary from one vehicle type to Table D 20 provides the criteria for selection of
another Table D 20 provides appropriate multipliers values for Column B For the 20-year analysis period
for a given growth rate and design period Any growth and the fixed growth factor of 2 percent per year for
factor selected should reflect consideration of the vari­ all vehicle types, a value of 24 30 is obtained Multi­
ables mentioned in Section D 1 plying Column A by Column B and then multiplying
The third column (C) is basically a product of the this number by 365 to annualize it, Column C can be
first two columns multiplied again by 365 The result completed
is the accumulated applications of specific vehicle Returning to the W-4 tables, summary information
types during the analysis period is provided for the average ESAL’s per 1,000 trucks
The fourth column (D) indicates the individual weighed For this example, under panel and pickup
ESAL values for each of the vehicle types trucks, the value is 12 2 ESAL per 1,000 trucks, or
The fifth column (E) is an extension of columns (C) 0 0122 per vehicle The W-4 table will provide similar
and (D) indicating the total ESAL’s (by vehicle type) information for each truck classification shown in
that might be applied to the sample section during the Table D 21
analysis period The summation of these values then is Finally, by multiplying the numbers in Column C
the total 18-kip ESAL traffic that should be used for by the values in Column D, Column E can be com­
pavement structural design pleted The summation of the numbers in Column E,
The number of equivalent axle loads derived using then, is the total design 18-kip ESAL value In the
the procedure represents the total for all lanes and first example, it has been predicted that this sample
both directions of travel This number must then be section will experience 43 8 million 18-kip ESAL ap­
distributed by direction and by lanes, as discussed in plications over the next 20 years assuming only a 2-
Section D 1 percent annual growth in traffic with no change in axle
Appendix D D-23

Table D.19. W orksheet for C alculating 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) Applications

Analysis Period = --------------------Years

L o ca tio n ______________________________
Assumed SN o r D = ____________

C u rren t Growth Design E .S.A .L . Design

Traffic Factors Traffic Factor E .S.A .L .
Vehicle Types (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)

Passenger Cars
Buses

Panel and Pickup Trucks

Other 2-Axle/4-Tire Trucks
2-Axle/6-Tire Trucks
3 or More Axle Trucks
All Single Unit Trucks

3 Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers

4 Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers
5 + Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers
All Tractor Semi-Trailers

5 Axle Double Trailers

6 + Axle Double Trailers
All Double Trailer Combos

3 Axle Truck-Trailers
4 Axle Truck-Trailers
5 + Axle Truck-Trailers
All Truck-Trailer Combos

Design
All Vehicles
E.S.A .L .
D-24 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table D.20. Traffic Grow th Factors*

A nnual Grow th Rate, Percent (g)
Analysis
Period No
Years (n) Grow th 2 4 5 6 7 8 10

1 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
2 2 0 2 02 2 04 2 05 2 06 2 07 2 08 2 10
3 30 3 06 3 12 3 15 3 18 3 21 3 25 3 31
4 4 0 4 12 4 25 4 31 4 37 4 44 4 51 4 64
5 50 5 20 5 42 5 53 5 64 5 75 5 87 6 11
6 6 0 6 31 6 63 6 80 6 98 7 15 7 34 7 72
7 70 7 43 7 90 8 14 8 39 8 65 8 92 9 49
8 80 8 58 9 21 9 55 9 90 10 26 10 64 11 44
9 9 0 9 75 10 58 11 03 11 49 11 98 12 49 13 58
10 10 0 10 95 12 01 12 58 13 18 13 82 14 49 15 94
11 11 0 12 17 13 49 14 21 14 97 15 78 16 65 18 53
12 12 0 13 41 15 03 15 92 16 87 17 89 18 98 21 38
13 13 0 14 68 16 63 17 71 18 88 20 14 21 50 24 52
14 14 0 15 97 18 29 19 16 21 01 22 55 24 21 27 97
15 15 0 17 29 20 02 21 58 23 28 25 13 27 15 31 77
16 16 0 18 64 21 82 23 66 25 67 27 89 30 32 35 95
17 17 0 20 01 23 70 25 84 28 21 30 84 33 75 40 55
18 18 0 21 41 25 65 28 13 30 91 34 00 37 45 45 60
19 19 0 22 84 27 67 30 54 33 76 37 38 41 45 51 16
20 20 0 24 30 29 78 33 06 36 79 41 00 45 76 57 28
25 25 0 32 03 41 65 47 73 54 86 63 25 73 11 98 35
30 30 0 40 57 56 08 66 44 79 06 94 46 113 28 164 49
35 35 0 49 99 73 65 90 32 111 43 138 24 172 32 271 02
(\ | 2)^ j rstc
♦ F a c to r = -— — — ------------- , w h e r e g = and is n o t z e r o I f a n n u a l g r o w th ra te is z e r o , th e g r o w t h fa c t o r is e q u a l to th e
g 100

a n a ly s is p e r io d

N o t e : T h e a b o v e g r o w t h f a c t o r s m u lt ip lie d b y t h e f ir s t y e a r t r a f f ic e s t im a t e w i l l g iv e t h e t o t a l v o lu m e o f t r a f f ic e x p e c t e d d u r in g

th e a n a ly s is p e r io d
Appendix D D-25

Table D.21. W orksheet for C alculating 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) Applications

Analysis Period = 20 Years

Location Example 1
Assumed SN o r D = 9"

C u rren t Growth Design E .S.A .L . Design

Traffic Factors Traffic Factor E .S.A .L .
Vehicle Types (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)

2%
Passenger Cars 5,925 24 30 52,551,787 0008 42,041
Buses 35 24 30 310,433 6806 211,280

Panel and Pickup Trucks 1,135 24 30 10,066,882 0122 122,816

Other 2-Axle/4-Tire Trucks 3 24 30 26,609 0052 138
2-Axle/6-Tire Trucks 372 24 30 3,299,454 1890 623,597
3 or More Axle Trucks 34 24 30 301,563 1303 39,294
All Single Unit Trucks

3 Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 19 24 30 168,521 8646 145,703

4 Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 49 24 30 434,606 6560 285,101
5 + Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 1,880 24 30 16,674,660 2 3719 39,550,626
All Tractor Semi-Trailers

5 Axle Double Trailers 103 24 30 913,559 2 3187 2,118,268

6 + Axle Double Trailers 0 24 30
All Double Trailer Combos

3 Axle Truck-Trailers 208 24 30 1,844,856 0152 28,042

4 Axle Truck-Trailers 305 24 30 2,705,198 0152 41,119
5 + Axle Truck-Trailers 125 24 30 1,108,688 5317 589,489
All Truck-Trailer Combos

Design
All Vehicles 10,193 90,406,816 43,772,314
ESAL
D-26 Design o f Pavement Structures

weights for each vehicle type and no change in vehicle D.4 H IG H LIG H TS FR O M TH E
type distribution over the analysis period EXAM PLE W ORKSHEETS
In a second example, Table D 22 assumes the same
base year traffic However, a 2-percent estimate is Sample location is a rural Interstate site in the mid­
assumed for passenger cars and buses, as well as west with an average daily traffic of 10,193 It is com­
single-unit trucks, a 4-percent growth in tractor semi­ prised of 58 percent passenger cars, 30 percent
trailer and truck full trailer combinations, and a 5- commercial trucks, and 12 percent light trucks and
percent growth in double trailer combinations Past buses The 18-kip ESAL values for passenger cars and
experience has shown that these estimates are not buses were developed from recent weight studies of
uncommon By using the appropriate growth factors actual vehicles traveling on the highway using traffic
in Column B and going through the exercise exactly as equivalency factors for each axle load group derived at
before, it is estimated that the total design 18-kip the AASHO Road Test
ESAL value is now 53 7 million, about 23 percent When using a conservative growth factor of 2 per­
more than in the first example cent per year over the entire traffic stream, about 44
million 18-kip ESAL will be applied to the highway
The third example shown in Table D 23 also uses
Increasing the growth rate from 2 percent to 4 or 5
the same base year traffic The assumed growth rate is
percent for other than single-unit vehicles (the heavier
increased to 4 percent for passenger vehicles and
trucks) will increase the ESAL totals to about 54 mil­
single-unit trucks, to 6 percent for tractor semi­
lion, an increase of about 23 percent By increasing
trailers and truck full trailer combinations, and to 7
the growth rate to a more aggressive value of 4 percent
percent for double trailer combinations This example
for light vehicles and 7 percent for heavier vehicle
results in a total design ESAL value of about 66 4 types, the total 18-kip ESAL value becomes about
million, or an increase of about 50 percent over the 66 million, an increase of some 52 percent over the
first example conservative growth rate of 2 percent
If, in these examples, it is assumed that the facility It is interesting to note that in the moderate growth
is a four-lane rural Interstate highway and that the rate of 2 percent to 5 percent, with large tractor semi­
directional and lane distribution factors are 0 5 and trailers estimated at 4-percent growth rate, just one
0 9, respectively, the design lane traffic estimates are vehicle can make a difference of almost 26,000 18-kip
calculated as follows: ESAL when extended from the daily traffic stream
Also, the five-axle or more tractor semi-trailer makes
Example 1: 5 X 9 X 43,772,314 = up about 18 percent of the traffic stream, but is esti­
19,697,541 18-kip ESAL mated to apply about 90 percent of the ESAL’s Even
with an aggressive growth rate of 6 percent, this vehi­
cle type will comprise about 21 percent of the total
Example 2: 5 X 9 X 53,726,060 =
vehicles expected to use the facility during the analy­
24,176,727 18-kip ESAL sis period, and also apply 90 percent of the ESAL’s A
6-percent growth rate may seem high, but on some
Example 3: 5 X 9 X 66,376,294 = Interstate routes, growth rates in excess of 9 percent
29,869,332 18-kip ESAL for trucks with five or more axles have been reported
Appendix D D-27

Table D.22. W orksheet for C alculating 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) Applications

Analysis Period = 20 Years

Location Example 2
Assumed SN o r D = 9"

C u rren t Growth Design E .S.A .L . Design

Traffic Factors Traffic Factor E .S.A .L .
Vehicle Types (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)
Daily Annual

2%
Passenger Cars 5,925 24 30 52,551,787 0008 42,041
Buses 35 24 30 310,433 6806 211,280

2%
Panel and Pickup Trucks 1,135 24 30 10,066,882 0122 122,816
Other 2-Axle/4-Tire Trucks 3 24 30 26,609 0052 138
2-Axle/6-Tire Trucks 372 24 30 3,299,454 1890 623,597
3 or More Axle Trucks 34 24 30 301,563 1303 39,294
All Single Unit Trucks
4%
3 Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 19 29 78 206,524 8646 178,561
4 Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 49 29 78 532,615 6560 349,396
5 + Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 1,880 29 78 20,435,036 2 3719 48,469,861
All Tractor Semi-Trailers

5%
5 Axle Double Trailers 103 33 06 1,242,891 2 3187 2,881,891
6 + Axle Double Trailers 0
All Double Trailer Combos

4%
3 Axle Truck-Trailers 208 29 78 2,260,898 0152 34,366
4 Axle Truck-Trailers 305 29 78 3,315,259 0152 50,392
5 + Axle Truck-Trailers 125 29 78 1,358,713 5317 722,427
All Truck-Trailer Combos

Design
All Vehicles 10,193 95,908,664 53,726,060
ESAL
D-28 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table D.23. W orksheet for C alculating 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) Applications

Analysis Period = 20 Years

Location Example 3
Assumed SN or D = 9"

C u rren t Growth Design E .S .A .L . Design

Traffic Factors Traffic Factor E .S.A .L .
Vehicle Types (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)

4%
Passenger Cars 5,925 29 78 64,402,972 0008 51,522
Buses 35 29 78 380,440 6806 258,927

4%
Panel and Pickup Trucks 1,135 29 78 12,337,109 0122 150,513
Other 2-Axle/4-Tire Trucks 3 29 78 32,609 0052 170
2-Axle/6-Tire Trucks 372 29 78 4,043,528 1890 764,227
3 or More Axle Trucks 34 29 78 369,570 1303 48,155
All Single Unit Trucks
6%
3 Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 19 36 79 255,139 8646 220,593
4 Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 49 36.79 657,989 6560 431,641
5 + Axle Tractor Semi-Trailers 1,880 36 79 25,245,298 2 3719 59,879,322
All Tractor Semi-Trailers

7%
5 Axle Double Trailers 103 41 00 1,541,395 2 3187 3,574,033
6 4- Axle Double Trailers 0 41 00
All Double Trailer Combos

6%
3 Axle Truck-Trailers 208 36 79 2,793,097 0152 42,455
4 Axle Truck-Trailers 305 36 79 4,095,647 0152 62,254
5 + Axle Truck-Trailers 125 36 79 1,678,544 5317 892,482
All Truck-Trailer Combos

Design
All Vehicles 10,193 117,833,337 66,376,294
ESAL
 APPENDIX E
POSITION PAPER ON SHOULDER DESIGN

Prepared by the AASHTO Joint Task Force on (8) Location (cut, fill, grade sections, etc )
Pavements, June 1983 (9) Construction techniques
During the early years of highway construction, the (10) Subgrade condition
need for first class shoulders was perhaps a secondary (11) Design features of adjacent mainline pavement
item But now with the tremendous increase in both
number and speed of vehicles, the need for adequate Some of the most pressing problems which can be
shoulders has greatly increased observed with present-day shoulders and which may
As defined by AASHTO, a highway shoulder is the need to be considered in the design are
“ portion of roadway contiguous with the traveled way
for accommodation of stopped vehicles for emergency (1) Design thickness as related to load-carrying
requirements
use, and for lateral support of base and surface
courses ” The definition is now almost universally (2) Cost and service criteria for stabilization of
accepted by all concerned with highway design, con­ shoulder aggregate base courses
struction, maintenance, and operations (3) Problems associated with the pavement edge
A Michigan study revealed that there is a wide and shoulder edge interface
variance of practices related to shoulder design This (4) Abrasive effects of traffic
study disclosed that California has developed a formal (5) Permeability or degree of imperviousness re­
design procedure for shoulders, 14 other states have quired for shoulder aggregate base courses
documented policies, 28 states have no policy, and 5 (6) Relationship between shoulder performance
states pave their shoulders integrally with the mainline and subgrade support
pavement It is apparent that a definite need exists to (7) Relationship of shoulder drainage subsystem
develop criteria to improve methodology throughout to overall subsurface drainage system
the United States in Shoulder Design (8) Construction and maintenance methods and
In the past, the design for the structural adequacy operations which result in adverse shoulder
of the shoulder was not considered to be critical be­ performance
cause the number of applications of heavy loads was (9) Effects of environment on shoulder per­
limited However, recent studies by Emery, Hicks, formance
Barksdale, and others have shown truck encroachment (10) Type and texture of shoulder surface for water­
to be one of the major causes of shoulder distress, proofing and delineating purposes
therefore, the relationship between traffic loading and (11) Effects of shoulder geometries on perform­
shoulder distress is much greater than was first real­ ance
ized This is only one factor or design variable that (12) Warrants for paved shoulders
must be considered before attempting to recommend
development of a national shoulder design policy It is noted that many authors, both researchers and
highway engineers knowledgeable in the field of pave­
Other factors to be considered in the design of shoul­
ment design, suggest the need for developing the
ders and the significant effects these factors have on
the overall design of a pavement are: necessary criteria for a unified and widely accepted
structural design guide for shoulders
(1) Thickness Regarding the specific design of shoulders, the fol­
(2) Width lowing recommendations are listed for review:
(3) Shoulder materials
(4) Seal at pavement and shoulder interface (1) Predicate shoulder thickness design upon
(5) Maintenance criteria which will reflect the magnitude and
(6) Permeability of shoulder frequency of loads to which the shoulder will
(7) Environmental factors be subjected

E -l
E-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

(2) Integrate shoulder drainage with the overall (6) For shoulder design, consider use of shoulders
pavement subdrainage design for detouring traffic and/or as an extra lane
(3) Avoid the use of aggregate base courses having during peak hours
a significant percentage of minus 200 mesh
sieve materials to prevent frost heaving, pump­
ing, clogging of the shoulder drainage system,
and base instability BIBLIOGRAPHY
(4) Take advantage of the desirable performance
features of plant-mixed bituminous and various 1 American Association of State Highway Offi­
stabilized shoulder materials as opposed to cials, “AASHO Highway Definitions,” June
bituminous surface-treated, unbound shoulder 1968
aggregate bases 2 American Concrete Paving Association,
(5) Have a definite program of shoulder mainte­ “ Concrete Shoulders Performance Construc­
nance tion Design Details,” Technical Bulletin No
(6) Take advantage of the desirable performance of 12, 1972
rigid shoulders adjacent to rigid main line 3 Barksdale, R D , and Hicks, R G , “ Improved
pavements Pavement Shoulder Joint Design ” NCHRP
(7) Incorporate criteria for paving shoulders Report 202, June 1979
4 “ Current Practices in Shoulder Design, Con­
It is recognized that the listing of problems associ­ struction, Maintenance and Operations,”
ated with shoulders and the recommendations given Highway Research Circular, HRB No 142,
are by no means comprehensive and should be supple­ April 1972
mented with information from other sources The pro­ 5 Emery, D K , Jr , “ Transverse Lane Place­
cedures and assumptions used to develop the design ment for Design Trucks on Rural Freeways,”
equations for both rigid and flexible could be utilized Preliminary Report, Georgia Department of
in the design of shoulders AASHTO has provided the Transportation, 1974
necessary groundwork; therefore, it appears that 6 Federal Highway Administration, “ Portland
definite design criteria must be agreed upon to com­ Cement Concrete Shoulders,” FHWA Techni­
plete the methodology for the Structural Design of cal Advisory T 5040 11, September 20, 1979
Shoulders 7 Goulden, W , “ Pavement Faulting Study,
This position paper was submitted to the states for Extent and Severity of Pavement Faulting in
comment in 1981 prior to adoption in 1983 by the Georgia,” Georgia Department of Transporta­
Joint Task Force on Pavements The comments tend to tion, Research Project No 7104, August 1972
reflect the preferences of individual agencies There 8 Haven, J H , and Rahal, A , “ Experimental
was no general consensus expressed; however, in Portland Cement Concrete Shoulder Design
order to provide some indication of the views of the and Construction,” Kentucky Department of
respondents, a listing of pertinent comments, as re­ Transportation, Research Report No 403
lated to this Guide, are summarized as follows 9 Hicks, R G , Barksdale, R D , and Emery,
D K , “ Design Practices for Paved Shoul­
(1) Design mainline and shoulders as a single unit, ders,” Transportation Research Record 594,
allows for future additions of new traveled 1976
lanes 10 Highway Design Manual, State of California,
(2) Paved shoulders should be of the same material Department of Public Works, 1972
as the mainline and concrete shoulders should 11 Highway Research Circular Number 142,
be tied to mainline “ Current Practices in Shoulder Design, Con­
(3) Provide for means to seal joint between shoul­ struction, Maintenance and Operations,” April
der and traveled way 1973
(4) Consider low-volume roads in developing 12 Hughes, R D , “ Concrete Shoulders,” Ken­
shoulder design criteria and investigate advan­ tucky Department of Transportation, Bureau
tages and economics of 28- to 30-foot mainline of Highways, Research Division
section with an aggregate shoulder 13 Illinois Division of Highways, “ Portland
(5) Give proper consideration to full-depth shoul­ Cement Concrete Shoulders,” Research and
der alternatives Development Report No 27, July 1970
Appendix E E-3

14 Illinois Division of Highways, “ Paved Shoul­ 20 Portigo, J M , “ State of Art Review of Paved
der Problems on Stevenson Expressway,” Shoulders,” Transportation Research Record
Research and Development Report No 19, 594, 1976
July 1967 21 Smith, H A , “ Pavement Design and the
15 Lokken, E C , “What We Have Learned to Decision-making Progress,” Proceedings from
Date from Experimental Concrete Shoulder a Conference on Utilization of Graded Aggre­
Projects,” presented to Highway Research gate Base Materials in Flexible Pavements,
Board Committee A2A07 on Shoulder Design, March 1974
January 1973 22 Spellman, D C , Stoker, J R , and Neal, B F ,
16 McKenzie, L J , “ Experimental Paved Shoul­ “ Faulting of Portland Cement Concrete Pave­
ders on Frost Susceptible Soils,” Illinois ments,” State of California, Department of
Department of Transportation, Research and Public Works, Division of Highways, Materi­
Development Reports No 24, December als and Research Department, Research
Report No 635167-2, January 1972
1969, and No 39, March 1972
23 Treybig, H J , Hudson, W R , and Abou-
17 National Cooperative Highway Research
Ayyash, A , “Application of Slab Analysis
Program, Syntheses of Highway Practice 63,
Method to Rigid Pavements,” Texas Univer­
“ Design and Use of Highway Shoulders,”
sity, Center for Highway Research, Texas
August 1979
Highway Department, FHWA Contract No
18 Novak, E C , J r , “ Study of Frost Action in
RESST 3-5-63-56
Class AA Shoulders Near Pontiac, Michigan,” 24 Arnold, D J , “ Experimental Concrete and Bi­
Michigan Department of State Highways and tuminous Shoulders,” Michigan Department
Transportation, Research Report No 671, of Highways and Transportation
April 1968 25 FHWA Report, “ Structural Analysis and
19 O’Toole, M L , “ Highway Shoulders Their Design of PCC Shoulders,” April 1982
Construction and Maintenance Problems,” 26 FHWA Technical Advisory T5040 18, “ Paved
Proceedings, Fifty-eighth Michigan Highway Shoulders,” July 29, 1982
Conference, 1973
 APPENDIX F
LIST OF TEST PROCEDURES

1 CBR, California Bearing Ratio (ASTM D 9 Resilient Modulus of Asphalt Concrete from
1883, AASHTO T 193, MilStd 621A): To de­ Diametral Strain (ASTM D 4123) To estimate
termine the load-bearing capacity The results the modulus of asphalt concrete and other rela­
are used to approximate the resilient modulus tively low-strength materials under simulated
2 Dynamic Modulus of Asphalt Mixtures field-loading conditions
(ASTM D 3497): To determine the dynamic 11 Splitting-Tensile Strength, Concrete (ASTM
modulus of bituminous material under stand­ C 496, AASHTO T 198) To determine the
ard compressive loading conditions splitting tensile strength of cylindrical concrete
3 Elastic Modulus of Portland Cement Concrete specimens such as molded cylinders and
(ASTM C 469) To determine the chord modu­ drilled cores
lus of elasticity in compression 12 Unconfined Compressive Strength:
4 Hveem Stability (ASTM D 1560, AASHTO For cohesive soils
T 246*): To determine resistance to deforma­ (ASTM D 2166, AASHTO T 208)
tion/cohesion, of compacted bituminous mix­ For cement-treated materials
tures (ASTM D 1633)
5 Marshall Stability (ASTM D 1559, AASHTO To find the unconfined compressive strength of
T 245): To determine the plastic flow rate of soils using molded cylinders as test specimens
bituminous mixtures 13 Joint Sealants for Concrete
6 Modulus of Rupture Cold applied specifications
Center Point Loading (ASTM D 1850)
(ASTM C 293, AASTHO T 177)
Hot poured specifications
Third Point Loading (ASTM D 3405, D 1190, D 3406)
(ASTM C 78, AASHTO T 97)
Preformed compression
These methods cover the determination of con­
(ASTM D 2628)
crete strength under flexural loading condi­
Cork filler for expansion joints
tions
(AASHTO M 153)
7 Plasticity Index (ASTM D 424, AASHTO
T 90) To find the range of water contents over
which the soil is in a plastic state *AASHTO M and T specifications are
8 R-value (ASTM D 2844, AASHTO T 190): To contained in the Standard Specifications fo r Transpor­
determine the load-bearing capacity of a tation Materials and Methods o f Sampling and
material Testing

F-l
 APPENDIX G
TREATMENT OF ROADBED SWELLING
AND/OR FROST HEAVE IN DESIGN

This appendix provides the procedures and graphs poor drainage, or other sources of moisture Lower
to predict the direct effect of roadbed swelling and values should be used when the roadbed soil has less
frost heave on serviceability loss It should be under­ access to moisture Figure G 2 provides a chart for
stood that both the design models presented herein subjectively estimating the rate of roadbed soil swell­
treat swelling and frost heave in terms of their differ­ ing, considering the available moisture supply and the
ential effects on the longitudinal profile of the road fabric of the roadbed soil A less subjective approach
surface Consequently, if experience indicates that ei­ to establishing values for this factor will be derived
ther swelling or frost heave will occur (relatively) uni­ once practitioners become more familiar with its
formly along the length of the roadway (thus having application and are able to calibrate it to actual field
little effect on road roughness and loss of serviceabil­ observations
ity), then these models should not be applied These The potential vertical rise (VR) represents the
design models should also not be applied if it is antici­ amount of vertical expansion that can occur in the
pated that an improved drainage system and/or the use roadbed soil under extreme swell conditions (i e ,
of frost control procedures (e g , placement of non- high plasticity and extended moisture availability)
frost-susceptible material) will eliminate the potential The designer may obtain VR from laboratory test
for differential swelling or frost heaving results, an empirical procedure, or by experience
Figure G 3 provides a chart that can be used to esti­
mate the potential vertical rise at a particular location
G .l ROADBED SW ELLIN G given the swelling layer’s plasticity index (ASTM Test
No D 424), moisture condition, and overall thickness
To generate the swelling curve, it is first necessary of the layer The moisture condition is a subjective
to estimate three variables which affect the rate and decision based on an estimate of how close the soil
potential magnitude of serviceability loss due to swell­ moisture conditions during construction are to the in
ing (1) swell rate constant, (2) potential vertical rise, situ moisture conditions at a later date
and (3) swell probability Generally, swelling need Swell probability represents the proportion (ex­
only be considered for fine-grained soils such as clays pressed as a percent) of the project length that is sub­
and silts It should also be recognized that all clays or ject to swell The probability of swelling at a given
silts are not swelling materials If a rehabilitation pro­ location is considered to be 100 percent if the roadbed
ject is being considered, then the designer should also soil plasticity index (AASHTO T 90) is greater than
recognize that much of the swelling may have already 30 and the layer thickness is greater than 2 feet (or if
occurred since much of the swell occurs in the first the VR is greater than 0 20 inches) Thus, the overall
few years after initial construction Thus, a low over­ swell probability can be estimated from the roadbed
all swell may be anticipated after overlay even though soil boring and laboratory test program If the project
the area has active swelling Recognition of this length is separated into swelling and nonswelling ma­
should lead the designer to take advantage of stage terials and they are treated separately, then a probabil­
construction alternatives Figure G 1 is provided to ity of 100 percent is used for the swelling sections
identify regions in the United States that are suscepti­ Table G 1 presents a form that can be used to tabu­
ble to swelling clay conditions late this data when developing the serviceability loss
The swell rate constant is a factor used to estimate versus time chart Each bore hole is representative of
the rate at which swelling will take place This con­ conditions over a specific section length Roadbed
stant can vary anywhere between 0 04 and 0 20 A thickness represents the thickness of the layer subject
higher value should be used when the soil is exposed to swell (for thicknesses greater than 30 feet, use 30
to a large moisture supply from either high rainfall, feet) The plasticity index (PI) is determined from

G -l
 G-2

Figure G.l. Occurrence and Distribution of Potentially Expansive Soils in the United States, Part I (S)
Design o f Pavement Structures
Appendix G G-3

ROADBED
MOISTURE SOIL
SUPPLY FABRIC

NOTES: a) L O W MOISTURE SUPPLY

L o w rainfall
Good drainage

b> HIGH M O I S T U R E S U P P L Y

High rainfall
Poor drainage
Vicinity of culverts, bridge abutments, inlet leads

c) SOIL FABRIC C O N D I T I O N S (self explanatory)

d) USE OF THE N O N O G R A P H

1) Select the appropriate moisture supply condition which ma y be somewhere between

low and high (such as A)

2) Select the appropriate soil fabric (such as B) This scale must be developed by each
individual agency

3) Draw a straight line between the selected points (A to B)

4) Read swell rate constant from the diagonal axis (read 0 10)

F igure G.2. N om ograph for Estim ating Swell Rate C onstant, P art II (I)
G-4 Design o f Pavement Structures
V)
Ll I
X
o
z
<N
UJ
ro (/) a
CC
I
<
O
o
(—
CC
to
Ul "3
> u
3
cS
< 55
t-
z o
UJ -C
<5 Cl)
CL
CD
#o
+■»
ro
00 £
O
5! 03
5 S’ E e
0)
to o o
-C _C c
£
0to) 03
>
P Q*3
C CD
-C CD
Q ■Co T— s
CO
s 03
O >
to O
1
O 03 co
-C to a
CD
_c _CO CJ a) a
cp c Q_ <S
03 Q.
£ 0 03 0)
CO c
*o T— 03 43
to + 1 CD
to a CD CD -— x: OD
c c c 0 S
■PM
o 0 CD 03
k—
CD D
*0 CO
<£>
Q. CD c s
0
E ~CD 0
O
-O X03
CO C 0) 03
to > O w
o
in
CD £ D
O
O
O Ui
X 03 _C CO O
,©
UJ E w 0 CO
CC
Q § < 0
to E CD >
z 0 CD -C
03
0 c E
O
o H- c c
^1- >- 0 0 £
0) 0
I— -C _c 'E CN 03
D
o c CD E 03
0 -C CD 0 ■O o
J— CL H— O
cn ZJ 0 _c
CD
to
03
< ■O 2
■O Z3 03 0
03 _co CO
c CO OD
CD '0 '0 5
O CO to $ 03 O'
0
*0 CD 0) ZZ a 03
o ■0
E ~o CD to 03 a)
CM Q. CD CO 03
03 c CD CD
CO 03 jQ
-Q
ZJ
0 _C to
CD O ■p O c
CO CO
T '■5 3 0
(D 03 c
CD _C CO _CD
JZ 0
H- H 0 < D
to _o
_C CD
H CD -Q cj O
 Appendix G
Table G.l. Table for Estimating Swell Parameters to Use for Design
Section Roadbed Soil Potential Swell
Bore Hole Length Thickness Plasticity Moisture Vertical Rise Soil Rate
Number (ft) (ft) Index (PI) Condition (in.) Fabric Constant
N
Tf
V)
VO
00
ON

<
10

14

IS
i
NO

G-5
G-6 Design o f Pavement Structures

Atterberg Limits Tests (AASHTO T 258) run on the by providing drainage to reduce the availability of free
fine-grained portion of the roadbed soil samples ob­ water Figure G 5 shows the distribution of seasonal
tained from the bore holes Moisture condition (or frost and permafrost in North America
supply) refers to the availability of moisture for road­ The model for frost heave is almost identical to that
bed soil absorption and VR represents the potential for roadbed swelling It was derived from the per­
vertical rise at a given site as determined from Figure formance of 18 experimental sections in the State of
G 3 or AASHTO T 258 Test Method Soil fabric rep­ Michigan There are three factors, each of which cor­
resents the capability of moisture to infiltrate the soil; responds to a similar factor for swelling (1) frost
most fine-grained soils beneath a pavement are neither heave rate, (2) maximum potential serviceability loss
fractured nor extremely tight The swell rate constant due to frost heave, and (3) frost heave probability
at a given site is estimated from Figure G 2 Frost h eave rate defines the rate of increase of frost
The design values for potential vertical rise and heave roughness (in millimeters per day) The rate of
swell rate constant are determined by calculating a heave depends on the type of roadbed material and its
weighted average (based on section length) Likewise, percentage of fine-grained material Figure G 6
for swelling probability, a weighted average percent presents a chart that may be used to estimate the rate
should be calculated based on the lengths of all the of heave based on the roadbed soil’s Unified Soil clas­
sections having a VR greater than 0 20 inches sification and percent (by weight) of material finer
With the three major swelling factors defined, it is than 0 02 mm (AASHTO T 88 or agency’s correlation
now possible to develop the swelling curve illustrated with the minus 200 material)
in Figure 2 2 in Part II This is accomplished by The maximum p o te n tia l servicea b ility loss due to
solving the swelling serviceability loss equation (see frost heave is dependent on the quality of drainage and
Figure G 3) for several time periods Although the the depth of frost penetration Figure G 5 provides a
actual equation may be better suited for generating graph that may be used to estimate maximum service­
this curve, the nomograph in Figure G 4 is helpful in ability loss based on these two factors Note that the
identifying the overall effects of the individual swell distinction between levels of drainage quality is the
parameters The time period used with the graph same as that defined in the treatment of drainage
should be equal to the analysis period, except where effects on material properties (Section 2 4 1, Part II)
stage construction or rehabilitation design strategies
are considered For these latter conditions the per­
Drainage Quality W ater Removed W ithin
formance period should be used
Excellent V2 day
Good 1 day
G.2 FRO ST HEAVE Fair 1 week
Poor 1 month
This section provides preliminary guidelines for Very Poor (never removed)
identifying the serviceability loss due to differential
frost heave As an agency develops its own criteria, it
may wish to replace the material herein If an agency Because of the relationship between drainage,
uses a procedure to reduce frost heave such as replace­ depth of frost penetration, and maximum serviceabil­
ment or placing susceptible materials below the frost ity loss, Figure G 7 may also be used to identify the
line, then the frost heave rate will be low or approach quality of drainage (or thickness of nonfrost-suscep­
zero The frost heave phenomenon is very similar to tible material) needed to control the maximum serv­
roadbed swelling in that it can result in a significant iceability loss Caution is advised, however, since this
loss of road serviceability due to differential expan­ graph represents more of a qualitative than quantita­
sion (the differential values of expansion are of inter­ tive relationship between the three factors
est not the total value) Frost heaving occurs when Frost heave p ro b a b ility should basically be the de­
free water in the roadbed soil collects and freezes to signer’s estimate of the percent area of the project that
form ice lenses The accumulation of thickness from will experience frost heave Obviously, this is affected
these ice lenses causes localized heaving of the pave­ by several factors including the extent of frost-suscep­
ment surface during extended frozen periods Obvi­ tible roadbed material, moisture availability, drainage
ously, frost heaving will not be a problem in areas quality, number of freeze-thaw cycles during the year,
which are arid or have a minimum frost penetration and depth of frost penetration The designer should
into the roadbed Frost heaving can also be minimized also rely heavily on past experience since, unlike
Appendix G G-7

F igure G.4. C h art for Estim ating Serviceability Loss Due to Roadbed Swelling
G-8 Design o f Pavement Structures

180'

170

160'

150'

140'

130'

120'

100* 90*
SCALE in s t a t u t e miles
0 400 800 1200
LEGEND
A R E A O F CONTINUOUS P E R M A F R O S T
A R E A O F DISCONTINUOUS A N D SPORADIC P E R M A F R O S T
F777I A R E A OF S E A S O N A L F R O S T ON L Y
APPRO X I M A T E S O U T H E R L Y LIMIT O F A R E A W H E R E S E A S O N A L F R O S T
M A Y BE E X P E C T E D TO P E N E T R A T E P A V E M E N T A N D B A S E TO A
D E P T H OF AT L E A S T 12 INCHES I Y E A R IN 10
3 FEET C O M B I N E D THICKNESS OF P A V E M E N T A N D G R A N U L A R , W E L L -
DRAINED B A S E REQUIRED TO P R E V E N T SUBSTANTIAL S U 8 G R A D E
FREEZING C O L D E S T W I N T E R IN 10

NOTE: Patches and islands of permafrost ma y be found in areas south of crosshatched zone,
particularly in elevated mountain locations

Figure G.5. Seasonal F rost and Perm afrost in N orth Am erica, P art II (43)
Appendix G G-9

F ro st
S u sc e p tib ility

30

V e ry H igh

10

High >*
■o
\
£
E
Medium
4>
O
X
o
Low 0)
o
* ,
a>
w
o
Very Low a>

N e g lig ib le

01
I 10
P ercen tage By W eight Finer Th an 0 0 2 mm

Gravelly Soils F 1 Fi F2 F3
S A N D S (Except Very Fine Silty SANDS)
F2 F3
Very Fine Silty S A N D S F4
ALL SILTS F4
CLA Y S (PI > 12) F3
C LA Y S (PI < 12) Varied CLA Y S & Other Fine-Grained Banded Sediments
F4

Figure G.6. C h art for Estim ating Frost Heave Rate for a Roadbed Soil, P a rt II (11)
G-10 Design o f Pavement Structures
Serviceability Loss Due to Frost Heave
)
p s i m a x
(A
Maximum

0 2 4 6 8 10

Depth of Frost Penetration (feet)

Figure G.7. G raph for Estim ating M axim um Serviceability Loss Due to F rost Heave
Appendix G G -ll

swelling probability, there is no clear-cut method for struction and rehabilitation strategies, the perform­
approximating frost heave probability ance period is used The frost heave serviceability loss
Once values for the three frost heave factors are curve should then be combined with the swelling serv­
defined, the equation for serviceability loss (presented iceability loss curve (if applicable) to produce a total
in Figure G 8) should be used to generate a frost heave serviceability loss versus time curve This curve will
serviceability loss curve similar to that presented in then be used as a component of the design procedure
Figure 2 2 (Part II) The time, t, used with Figure G 8 discussed in Chapter 3, Part II
should be equal to the analysis period For stage con­

Figure G.8. C h art for Estim ating Serviceability Loss Due to Frost Heave
 APPENDIX H
FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN EXAMPLE

The following example is provided to illustrate the ity Thus, a 90-percent overall reliability level was
flexible pavement design procedure presented in Sec­ selected for design This means that for a two-stage
tion 3 1 of Part II The design requirements for this strategy (initial pavement plus one overlay), the de­
example are described here in the same order as they sign reliability for each stage must be 0 901/2 or 95
are in Part II, Chapter 2 percent Similarly, for a three-stage strategy (initial
pavement plus two overlays), the design reliability for
all three stages must be 0 901/3 or 96 5 percent
H .l DESIGN REQUIREMENTS Another criteria required for the consideration of
reliability is the overall standard deviation (S„)
Time Constraints Although it is possible to estimate this parameter
through an analysis of variance of all the design fac­
The analysis period selected for this design exam­ tors (see Volume 2, Appendix EE), an approximate
ple is 20 years The maximum performance period (or value of 0 35 will be used for the purposes of this
service life) selected for the initial flexible pavement example problem
structure in this example is 15 years Thus, it will be
necessary to consider stage construction (i e , planned
rehabilitation) alternatives to develop design strategies
which will last the analysis period Environmental Impacts

Eighty bore holes were obtained along the 16-mile

Traffic length of the project (approximately one every thou­
sand feet) Based on an examination of the borehole
Based on average daily traffic and axle weight samples and subsequent soil classifications, it was de­
data from the planning group, the estimated two-way termined that the soil at the first twelve bore hole sites
18-kip equivalent single axle load (ESAL) applica­ (approximately 12,000 feet) was basically of the
tions during the first year of the pavement’s life is 2 5 same composition and texture Significantly different
X 106 and the projected (compound) growth rate is results were obtained from examinations at the other
3 percent per year The directional distribution bore hole sites Based on this type of unit delineation,
factor (Dd) is assumed to be 50 percent and the lane this 12,000-foot section of the project will be designed
distribution factor (DL) for the facility (assume three separately from all the rest
lanes in one direction) is 80 percent Thus, the traffic, The site of this highway construction project is in a
during the first year (in the design lane) is 2 5 X location that can be environmentally classified as U S
106 X 0 80 X 0 50 or 1 0 X 106 18-kip ESAL appli­ Climatic Region II, i e ., wet with freeze-thaw cycling
cations Figure H 1 provides a plot of the cumulative The soil is considered to be a highly active swelling
18-kip ESAL traffic over the 20-year analysis period clay Because of this and the availability of moisture
The curve and equation for future traffic (w18) are from high levels of precipitation, a drainage system
reflective of the assumed exponential growth rate (g) will be constructed which is capable of removing
of 3 percent excess moisture in less than 1 day The duration of
below-freezing temperatures in this environment,
however, is not sufficient to result in any problems
Reliability with frost heaving
Table H 1 summarizes the data used to consider the
Although the facility will be a heavily trafficked effects of roadbed swelling on future loss of service­
state highway, it is in a rural situation where daily ability Columns 1 and 2 indicate the bore hole
traffic volumes should never exceed half of its capac­ number and length of the corresponding section (or

H -l
H-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

w is (millions)
Traffic,
18-kip ESAL
Cumulative

0 5 10 15 20

Time, t (years)

Figure H .l. Plot of Cumulative 18-kip ESAL Traffic Versus Time for Assumed Conditions
 Appendix H
Table H .l. Table for Estimating Swell Parameters for Flexible Pavement Design Example

r-
(N
Section Roadbed Soil Potential Swell
Bore Hole Length Thickness Plasticity Moisture Vertical Rise Soil Rate
Number (ft) (ft) Index (PI) Condition (in.) Fabric Constant
006
>30 48 Optimum 0.82 rel. tight 0.07

*
1,200 >30 56 1.34

*
VO

*
00
o
o

2.20
ro

>30
000 01 0

:=
in
1,000 >30

©
©

o
©
C --
*
in

1,000 >30 46
1 981

*
vo

1,100 >30 62
00 3
1,000 >30 65
006 09T
i- H

*
00

>30
!

*
CO
00
Os

1,200 >30 0.28

'
•
09

00
©
00
©

*
o

>30 1
006 000 oro
O s

>30 *
©

*
©

T— H

>30 1.04 0.07

ro

14

15

16

H-3
Total 12,000
H-4 Design o f Pavement Structures

segment) of the project The depth to any rigid Serviceability

foundation at the site is, for all practical purposes,
semi-infinite (Roadbed soil thicknesses greater than Based on the traffic volume and functional classifi­
30 feet are considered to be semi-infinite ) cation of the facility (6-lane state highway), a terminal
Column 4 shows the average plasticity index (PI) of serviceability (pt) of 2 5 was selected Past experience
the soil at each bore hole location PI values above 40 indicates (for the purposes of this hypothetical ex­
are indicative of potential high volume change of the ample) that the initial serviceability (p0) normally
material achieved for flexible pavements in the state is signifi­
Column 5 represents the estimated moisture condi­ cantly higher than that at the AASHO Road Test (4 6
tion of the roadbed material after pavement con­ compared to 4 2) Thus, the overall design service­
struction Because of the plan to construct a “good” ability loss for this problem is:
drainage system, the future moisture conditions are
considered to be “ optimum” throughout the project APSI = p., - pt = 4 6 - 2 5 = 21
length
Column 6 presents the results of applying the chart
in Figure G 3 of Appendix G to estimate the potential
vertical rise (VR) at each bore hole location Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus
Column 7 represents a qualitative estimate of the
fabric of the soil or the rate at which it can take on Figure H 3 summarizes the data used to character­
moisture The natural impermeability of clay materi­ ize the effective resilient modulus of the roadbed soil
als means that the soil at this site tends towards Individual moduli are specified for 24 half-month in­
“ tight ” This, combined with the relatively low mois­ tervals to define the seasonal effects These values are
ture supply (due to the installation of a drainage also reflective of the roadbed support that would be
system), means that the swell rate constant at each expected under the improved moisture conditions
provided by the “ good” drainage system
location having a “ tight” fabric (i e , plasticity index
(PI) greater than about 20) can be estimated at 0 07
(see Figure G 2 in Appendix G) For the occasions Roadbed Roadbed Soil
where PI was less than 20, a value of 0 10 was used Moisture Resilient Modulus
because of the likelihood of greater permeability Condition (psi)
Based on the data in Table H 1, the overall swell
Wet 5,000
rate constant and potential vertical rise are determined
Dry 6,500
by calculating a weighted average; thus,
Spring-Thaw 4,000
Frozen 20,000
Swell Rate Constant = 0 075

Potential Vertical Rise (VR) = 1 2 inches The frozen season (from mid-January to mid-Feb­
ruary) is 1 month long, the spring-thaw season (mid-
February to March) is 0 5 months long, the wet peri­
The swelling probability is simply the percent of the ods (March through May and mid-September through
length of the project which has a potential vertical rise mid-November) total 5 months, and the dry periods
greater than 0 2 inches 10,100 feet out of the total (June through mid-September and mid-November
through mid-January) total 5 5 months Application of
12,000 have a VR greater than 0 2 inches, thus the
the effective roadbed soil MR estimation procedure
swelling probability is 84 percent
results in a value of 5,700 psi
These factors were then used to generate the serv­
iceability loss versus time curve presented in Figure
H 2 The curve shown was generated using the equa­
tion presented in Figure G 4 of Appendix G This Pavement Layer Materials Characterization
represents a graph of the estimated total environmen­
tal serviceability loss versus time, since frost heave is Three types of pavement materials will constitute
not a consideration the individual layers of the structure The moduli for
Appendix H H-5

_Q
T
0O
)
O
>
0)
CO

£^
c <3
o ..
— CD
> to
c o

10 15 20

Time, t (years)

Figure H .2. G raph of Environm ental Serviceability Loss Versus Time for
Swelling Conditions Considered

each, determined using the recommended laboratory Drainage Coefficient

test procedures, are as follows:
The only item that is considered under the heading
“ Pavement Structural Characteristics” (Part II,
Asphalt Concrete EAC= 400,000 psi
Section 2 4) in the design of a flexible pavement is the
Granular Base EBS = 30,000 psi method of drainage The drainage coefficient
(m-value) corresponding to the granular base and sub­
Granular Subbase: ESB= 11,000 psi
base materials for a “ good” drainage system (i e ,
water removed within 1 day) and the balanced wet-dry
These values correspond to the average year-round climate of U S Climatic Region II is 1 20 (The range
moisture conditions that would be expected without in Part II, Table 2 4, for 1 to 5 percent moisture expo­
any type of pavement drainage system (The effects of sure time is 1 15 to 1 25 )
positive drainage on material requirements are consid­
ered in a later section )

H .2 DEVELOPM ENT O F IN IT IA L STAGE

Layer Coefficients O F A DESIGN ALTERNATIVE

The structural layer coefficients (ar values) corres­ Since the estimated maximum performance period
ponding to the moduli defined in the previous section (15 years) is less than the design analysis period
are as follows: (20 years), any initial structure selected will require
an overlay to last the analysis period The thickest
Asphalt Concrete: a] = 0 42 (Figure 2 5, Part II) recommended initial structure (evaluated here) is that
corresponding to the maximum 15-year performance
Granular Base: a2 = 0 14 (Figure 2 6, Part II)
period Thinner initial structures, selected for the pur­
Granular Subbase: a3 = 0 08 (Figure 2 7, Part II) pose of life-cycle cost analyses, will require thicker
H-6 Design o f Pavement Structures

Roadbed Relative 30 ,0 0 5
Soil Damage
Month Modulus, u
M (psi)
01
6,500 0 167 20
Jan
20,000 0 012

20,000 0 012
Feb
4,000 0 515

5,000 0 307
Mar
5,000 0 307 05
5,000 0 307 10
Apr
5,000 0 307 a
10
5,000
o
0 307
Ma y
5,000 0 307

6,500 0 167
June 3 <D
6 500 0 167
•O
o c05
a
E
03
6,500 0 167 c Q
July 05
6 500 0 167 50
<x> iS
£T a> II
6,500 0 167 oc
Aug 'o
6,500 0 167
CO 3
*0D
JD) 10 C
o
6 500 0 167 "O
CO 03
O 3
5,000 0 307 DC O*

5,000 0 307

5,000 0 307

5,000 0 307

6,500 0 167
50
6,500 0 167

6,500 0 167
10 0
Summation: u 5 446
13 0

Average: = 5 46 = 0 227
n 24

Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus, M R (psi) 5,700

(corresponds to u f

F igure H .3. Estim ation of Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient M odulus

Appendix H H-7

overlays (at an earlier date) to last the same analysis roadbed soil resilient modulus) Values of EBS equal to
period 30,000 psi, first stage reliability (R) equal to 95 per­
The strategy with the maximum recommended ini­ cent, w 18 equal to 16 0 X 106 and APSITR equal to
tial structure number is determined using the effective 1 89 (the latter two are from Table H 2) result in an
roadbed soil resilient modulus of 5,700 psi, a reliabil­ SN! of 3 2 Thus, the asphalt concrete surface thick­
ity of 95 percent, an overall standard deviation of ness required is
0 35, a design serviceability loss of 2 1 and the cumu­
lative traffic at the maximum performance period,
18 6 X 106 18-kip ESAL (from Figure H 1 for a time D f = SNj/aj = 3 2/0 42 = 7 6 (or 8 inches)
of 15 years) Applying Figure 3 1 from Part II, the
result is a maximum initial structure number (SN) of SNf = a,D? = 0 42 x 8 = 3 36
5 6 Because of serviceability loss due to swelling
however, an overlay will be required before the end of
the 15-year design performance period Using the Similarly, using the subbase modulus of 11,000 psi
step-by-step procedure described in Part II, Section as the effective roadbed soil resilient modulus, SN2
3 1 3, the service life that can actually be expected is is equal to 4 5 and the thickness of base material re­
about 13 years (see Table H 2) Thus, the overlay that quired is
must be designed will need to carry the remaining 18-
kip ESAL traffic over the last 7 years of the analysis
period D f = (SN2 - SNf)/(a2m2)

= (4 5 — 3 36)/(0 14 X 1 20)
H .3 DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL
= 6 8 (or 7 inches)
LAYER THICKNESSES FOR
INITIAL STRUCTURE SNf = 7 X 0 14 X 1 20 = 1 18
The thicknesses of each layer above the roadbed
soil or subgrade are determined using the procedure Finally, the thickness of subbase required is
described in Part II, Section 3 1 4 (See Figure 3 2 )
For the design SN of 5 6 developed in this example,
the determination of the layer thicknesses is demon­ D* = (SN3 - (SN f 4- SN f))/(a3m3)
strated below:
Solve for the SN required above the base material = (5 6 - (3 36+ 1 18))/(0 08 X 120)
by applying Figure 3 1 (in Part II) using the resilient
modulus of the base material (rather than the effective = 11 inches

Table H .2, Reduction in Performance Period (Service Life) of Initial Pavement

Arising From Swelling Considerations

Initial SN 5 6
Maximum Possible Performance Period (years) ^
Design Serviceability Loss, APSI = p0 — pt = 4 6 -2 5 = 21

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Trial Serviceability Corresponding Allowable Corresponding
(1) Performance Loss Due to Serviceability Loss Cumulative Performance
Iteration Period Swelling Due to Traffic Traffic Period
No. (years) APSIsw APSI tr (18-kip ESAL) (years)
1* 13 0 21 1 89 16 0 X 106 13 2
*Convergence achieved after only one iteration
 APPENDIX I
RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN EXAMPLE

The following example is provided to illustrate the overall reliability level of 90 percent was chosen for
rigid pavement design procedure presented in Part II, design This means that for a two-stage strategy (ini­
Section 3 2 The design requirements for this example tial pavement plus one overlay), the design reliability
are described here in the same order as they appear in for design This means that for a two-stage strategy
Part II, Chapter 2 (initial pavement plus one overlay), the design relia­
bility for each stage must be 0 901/2 or 95 percent
Similarly, for a three-stage strategy (initial pavement
1.1 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS plus two overlays), the design reliability for all three
stages must be 0 901/3 or 96 5 percent
Time Constraints Another criteria required for the consideration
of reliability is the overall standard deviation (S0)
The analysis period selected for this design ex­ Although it is possible to estimate this parameter
ample is 35 years The maximum initial performance through an analysis of variance of all the design fac­
period (or service life) selected for the initial rigid tors (see Volume 2, Appendix EE), an approximate
pavement structure in this example is 25 years Thus, value of 0 29 will be used for the purposes of this
it will be necessary to consider stage construction example
(i e , planned rehabilitation) to develop design strate­
gies which will last the analysis period

Environmental Impacts
Traffic
A soil survey consisting of bore holes taken at
Based on average daily traffic and axle weight data, approximate 1,000-foot intervals shows that soil con­
the estimated two-way 18-kip equivalent single axle ditions do not vary substantially along the length of
load (ESAL) applications during the first year of the the project Thus, one pavement cross-section design
pavement’s life is 357,000 and the projected (com­ will serve for the entire project length
pound) growth rate is 3 percent per year The direc­ The site where this project is to be constructed is
tional distribution factor (Dd), is assumed to be 50 located in U S Climatic Region I, i e , wet with
percent and the lane distribution factor (DL), for the freeze-thaw cycling The roadbed soil is a clay mate­
facility (assume three lanes in one direction) is 80 rial which is susceptible to swelling Because of this
percent Thus, the traffic during the first year of the and the high level of available moisture that is com­
analysis period (in the design lane) is 357,000 X 0 80 mon to this region, a drainage system will be con­
X 0 50 or 142,800 18-kip ESAL applications Figure structed capable of removing excessive moisture in
I 1 provides a plot of the cumulative 18-kip ESAL 1 day or less The duration of below-freezing tempera­
traffic over the 35-year analysis period The curve and tures in this region, however, is not sufficient to war­
equation for future traffic (wi8) are reflective of the rant frost-heave consideration in the design process
assumed exponential growth rate (g) of 3 percent Table I 1 summarizes the data used to characterize
the parameters of roadbed swelling that influence fu­
ture serviceability loss Columns 1 and 2 indicate the
Reliability bore hole number and length of the corresponding
section (or segment) of the project The depth to
The highway facility being designed is a heavily any rigid foundation at the site is, for all practical
trafficked state highway in a rural region where the purposes, semi-infinite (i e , greater than 30 feet)
expected daily traffic volumes should never exceed Column 4 shows the average plasticity index (PI) of
half of the capacity Based on this information, an the soil at each bore hole site Values of PI above 40

1-1
1-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

c
0
1
00

f
u
CD
f—
<
CO
UJ
Q.
J*C
CO

3
E
D
u

0 10 20 30 40

Tim e, t (years)

Figure 1.1. Plot of Cumulative 18-kip ESAL Traffic Versus Time for Assumed Conditions

are indicative of soils with a high potential for volume low moisture supply (due to the installation of a drain­
change age system), means that the swell rate constant at each
Column 5 represents the estimated moisture condi­ location having a “ tight” fabric (i e , plasticity index
tion of the roadbed material after pavement construc­ (PI) greater than about 20) can be estimated at 0 07
tion Because of the plan to construct a good drainage (see Figure G 2 in Appendix G) For the occasions
system, the future moisture conditions are considered where PI was less than 20, a value of 0 10 was used
to be “ optimum” throughout the project length because of the likelihood of greater permeability
Column 6 presents the results of applying the chart The overall swell rate constant and potential verti­
in Figure G 3 (Appendix G) to estimate the potential cal rise are determined by calculating a weighted aver­
vertical rise (VR) at each bore hole location age based on the data from Table I 1, thus:
Column 7 represents a qualitative estimate of the
soil fabric or the rate at which the soil can absorb
moisture The natural impermeability of clay means Swell Rate Constant = 0 072
that the soil fabric at this site is relatively tight (i e ,
low permeability) This, combined with the relatively Potential Vertical Rise (VR) = 1 23 inches
 Appendix I
Table 1.1. Table for Estimating Swell Parameters for Rigid Pavement Design Example

s'w'

So
S

S'
Section Roadbed Soil Potential Swell
Bore Hole Length Thickness Plasticity Moisture Vertical Rise Soil Rate
Number (ft) (ft) Index (PI) Condition (in.) Fabric Constant

950 >30 Optimum 1.04 rel. tight 0.07

Z.00
O
(S

O
>30 56 1.34

00
©

VO
i-H
©^
©

>30 0.07
000

©
©
o
(N
r-"
950 >30

©
00
<n

1,200 >30 49 0.07

VO

©
©

>30 70 2.59 0.07

09

00
©

©
©
t-

1,050 >30
in
in
00

950 >30 1.30 0.07

©
©
o
0\

T—
©^
©
©

>30 47 0.71
4

VO
n
©^
©
©
r—

10 >30 2.00 0.07

*

000
cs

1,100 >30 0.07

006
in

12 >30 1.04 0.07

006
>30 70 2.59 0.07
13
Z.0‘0
©
©

VO
m
r'H
rH

14 | >30 2.00
i
000 o ro
t-h

15 1,200 >30
006
VO

r-*

>30 0.71 0.07

1-3
Total 16,300
1-4 Design o f Pavement Structures

The swelling probability is simply the percent of the APSI = p0 - p, = 4 5 - 2 5 = 2 0

project’s length that has a potential vertical rise
greater than 0 2 inches 13,050 feet out of the total
16,300-foot project length have a VR greater than 0 2 Effective M odulus of S ubgrade Reaction
inches, thus the swelling probability is 80 percent
These factors were then used to generate the serv­ Because of the effects of subbase characteristics on
iceability loss versus time curve presented in Figure the effective modulus of subgrade reaction (k), its cal­
I 2 The curve was generated using the equation culation is included as a step in the iterative design
shown in Figure G 4 (Appendix G) Since frost heave procedure described in a later section
is not considered, this curve represents the total esti­
mated environmental serviceability loss with time
Pavement Layer M aterials C haracterization

Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavements are

Serviceability generally laid on either a modified roadbed soil or
subbase material This design example will consider a
Based on the traffic volume and functional classifi­ PCC pavement placed on a granular subbase material
cation of the facility, a terminal serviceability (pt) of The modulus for both the PCC slab and subbase
2 5 was selected for design Since the initial service­ layer, determined using the recommended laboratory
ability (p0) is expected to be 4 5, the overall design test procedures (see Section 2 3 3 in Part II), are as
serviceability loss for this problem is: follows:

CO
CL

-Q
C
0U)*
>
(/)

0)
E
c
o
>
c
UJ

10 20 30 40

Time, t (years)

Figure 1.2. Plot of Environm ental Serviceability Loss Versus Time for Swelling Conditions Considered
Appendix I 1-5

Portland Cement Concrete: for pumping to occur, therefore, the minimum value
Ec = 4,200,000 psi of LS equal 1 0 was selected for this design example

Granular Subbase:
E sb = 15,000 psi (wet conditions) and Reinforcement for Jointed Concrete Pavement
25,000 psi (dry conditions)
The reinforcement required is a function of the
steel working stress, the joint spacing, and the slab-
PCC Modulus of Rupture base friction factor The steel that will be used in this
design example is Grade 60 billet steel; therefore,
Using the recommended flexural beam test proce­ the working stress is equal to 60,000 psi X 0 75 or
dures, the mean value for the modulus of rupture 45,000 psi The joint spacing is 30 feet and the fric­
(flexural strength) of the portland cement concrete tion factor for a slab on a granular material is approxi­
was determined to be 578 psi This represents the mately 1 5
average 28-day strength from numerous specimens
testing using third point loading
1.2 DEVELOPMENT OF INITIAL STAGE
OF A DESIGN ALTERNATIVE
Drainage
Since the estimated maximum performance period
(25 years) is less than the analysis period (35 years),
The drainage coefficient for rigid pavements (Cd),
any initial structure selected will require an overlay to
is a function of the prevailing drainage condition and
last the analysis period The thickest recommended
the average yearly rainfall For this design example,
initial structure is that corresponding to the maximum
the quality of drainage is assumed to be “ good” (i e ,
performance period (25 years) Thinner initial struc­
water removed within 1 day) and the percent of time
tures, selected for the purpose of life-cycle cost analy­
the pavement is exposed to moisture levels approach­
ses, will require thicker overlays (at an earlier date) to
ing saturation is from 5 to 25 percent of the year
last the analysis period
Based on this criteria, a value of 1 05 for Cd was
selected from Table 2 5 in Part II
Develop Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction

Load Transfer Slab support is estimated using a step-by-step pro­

cedure to define alternate levels of the effective modu­
The pavement being designed is a jointed rein­ lus of subgrade reaction (k) based on the subbase
forced concrete pavement with tied PCC shoulders (10 characteristics and the seasonal variation of roadbed
feet wide) The joint spacing is 30 feet with dowel soil resilient modulus This is accomplished using
bars providing load transfer at each joint The load Figures 3 3, 3 4, 3 5, and 3 6 from Part II, Section
transfer coefficient (J) selected for this condition 3 2 The results for one subbase design (6 inches of
(from Part II, Section 2 4 4) is 2 8 This compares to granular material) are illustrated in Table I 2,
the value of 3 2 that would normally be used for a The first step is to estimate the combinations (or
jointed pavement without tied shoulders levels) that are to be considered and enter them in the
heading of the table For each subbase combination
evaluated, a separate table is required This example
Loss of Support considers only the combination shown in Table I 2
The second step of the process is to estimate the
Table 2 6 in Part II provides recommended loss of seasonal roadbed soil resilient modulus values For
support factors (LS) indicative of the potential for this example problem, the year is divided into 12 con­
voids to form beneath the slab This table indicates a secutive 1-month time intervals with an appropriate
range of LS between 1 0 and 3 0 for the conditions seasonal modulus value defined for each These val­
specified in this example (i e , unbound granular ues (shown below) reflect the enhanced support that
material) Because of the planned construction of a would be expected under the improved moisture con­
“ good” drainage system, there will be less potential ditions provided by a “ good” drainage system
1-6 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 1.2. Estim ation of Effective M odulus of Subgrade Reaction for Design Example

T rial Subbase: T y p e _________Granular Depth to Rigid Foundation (fe e t).

Thickness (in ch es)_______6" Projected Slab Thickness (inches)
Loss of S upport, LS 10

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

k-Value (pci)
Roadbed Subbase Composite on Rigid Relative
M odulus, M odulus, k-Value (pci) Foundation Damage, u r
M onth M r (psi) E sb (psi) (Fig. II-3.3) (Fig. II-3.4) (Fig. II-3.5)
5,000 15,000 260 — 12
Jan

5,000 15,000 260 — 12

Feb

5,000 15,000 260 — 12

Mar

5,000 15,000 260 — 12

Apr

5,000 15,000 260 — 12

May

6,500 25,000 390 _ 10

June

6,500 25,000 390 — 10

July

6,500 25,000 390 — 10

Aug

6,500 25,000 390 — 10

Sept

6,500 25,000 390 — 10

Oct

5,000 15,000 260 — 12

Nov

5,000 15,000 260 — 12

Dec

Eur 13 4 Summation Eur = 13 4

Average: T 1 12
n 12
Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (pci) =
Corrected for Loss of Support: k (pci) =
Appendix I 1-7

Roadbed Roadbed Soil quired The objective of this iterative process is to

Soil Resilient Modulus identify (for a trial slab thickness) when the combined
Condition (psi) serviceability loss due to traffic and environment
Wet 5,000 reach the design level Application of this process for
Dry 6,500 the design example is shown in Table I 3 and de­
Spring-thaw 4,000 scribed below
Frozen 20,000
Step 1. The application of planned stage con­
struction in the design process means that there is a
(The frozen and spring-thaw seasons are practically range of slab thicknesses that can be initially con­
nonexistent for the environment considered in this de­ structed The minimum thickness is that which would
sign example The wet season is 7 months and the dry provide the minimum acceptable service life The
season is 5 months ) maximum practical slab thickness is that which would
The third step in estimating the effective k-value is provide the maximum performance period (25 years)
to record the subbase elastic (resilient) modulus (ESB) without any consideration of roadbed soil swelling
values for each season These values, 15,000 psi for Using the latter case in this design example results in a
the dry season and 25,000 psi for the wet season, were slab thickness of 9 inches* (from Figure 3 7 in Part
entered in Column 3 of Table I 2 The seasons for II) The following steps are to estimate the expected
subbase modulus variation are the same as those used service life of the 9-inch slab when swelling is con­
for the roadbed soil resilient modulus sidered
The fourth step is to estimate the composite modu­ [*N o t e : Although the 9-inch slab apparently dif­
lus of subgrade reaction for each 1-month interval fers significantly from the 10-inch projected value
using Part II, Figure 3 3, and the values from the first used in Table I 2, the difference in terms of their
two steps The results for the design example are en­ effects on the effective k-value is not significant The
tered in Column 4 of Table I 2
effective k-value for a 10-inch slab (prior to correction
The fifth step is to develop a k-value which reflects
for loss of support) was 320 pci; the effective k-value
the presence of a rigid foundation at some close depth
assuming a 9-inch slab is 300 pci ]
below the surface For this example, the rigid founda­
tion is more than 30 feet below the surface of the
subgrade and, according to criteria in Part II, has no Step 2. The initial trial performance period must
influence on the composite k-value be less than the maximum possible performance per­
The sixth step is to project the slab thickness and iod (25 years) For this step, a trial period of 20 years
use Figure 3 5 in Part II to estimate the relative dam­ was selected (Column 2)
age (ur) corresponding to one 18-kip equivalent single
axle load in each season For this example, the pro­ Step 3. Using the graph of cumulative environ­
jected slab thickness is 10 inches The ur values are mental serviceability loss versus time (Figure I 2), an
entered in Column 6 estimate of serviceability loss due to roadbed swelling
The seventh step is to add all the relative damage corresponding to the trial period was determined For
values in Column 6 and determine the average (1 12 in
this example, APSIsw is equal to 0 25 at 20 years
the example) The effective k-value corresponding to
(Column 3)
this average relative damage (from Figure 3 5 in Part
II) is 320 pci
The last step of this process is to correct the effec­ Step 4. Subtract the serviceability loss due to
tive k-value for loss of support Given that the loss swelling from the design total serviceability loss
of support factor (LS) is 1 0, the corrected effective (APSI = 12 0) to estimate the corresponding service­
k-value (from Figure 3 6 in Part II) is 105 pci ability loss due to traffic The result is APSITR =
2 0 - 0 25 = 1 75 (Column 4)

Slab Thickness Step 5. Using Figure 3 7 from Part II, the esti­
mated allowable cumulative 18-kip ESAL traffic is
Because swelling will lead to serviceability loss in determined For this example, the result is 4 6 x 106
this design example, an iterative procedure is re­ 18-kip ESAL (Column 5)
[-8 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table 1.3. Reduction in Performance Period (Service Life) Arising from Swelling Consideration

Initial Pavement Thickness w u

Maximum Possible Performance Period (years)
Design Serviceability Loss, APSI = pD — pt =

(2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Trial Serviceability Corresponding Allowable Corresponding
(1) Performance Loss Due to Serviceability Loss Cumulative Performance
Iteration Period Roadbed Swelling Due to Traffic Traffic Period
No. (years) A PSISw A)PSItr (18-kip ESAL) (years)
1 20 0 0 25 1 75 4 6 X 106 22 9
2 21 5 0 26 1 74 4 5 X 106 22 8

Step 6. Using Figure I 1, the time corresponding Application of the nomograph for these conditions
to 4 6 X 106 18-kip ESAL applications is approxi­ results in a required longitudinal steel reinforcing per­
mately 22 9 years (Column 6). centage of 0 05 percent Since there are three 12-foot
lanes and a 10-foot-wide PCC shoulder (all tied at the
Step 7. Since the pavement life calculated in Step longitudinal joints), the transverse steel percentage re­
6 is not within 1 year of the trial performance period, quired is somewhat higher (0 075 percent)
the iterative process must continue The trial perform­
ance period is now 2 1 5 years and the process returns
to Step 3 The results of the second iteration indicate
Tie Bar Design
that regardless of the trial estimate for the perform­
ance period, the outcome in Column 6 will always be
Since the pavement will consist of three 12-foot-
about 23 years Thus, no more iterations are required
wide PCC lanes with a 10-foot-wide (tied) PCC
For this particular example design, the pavement
shoulder on the outside lane, the distances to the near­
cross section consists of a 9-inch jointed reinforced
est free edge (as illustrated in Figure I 3) are 12, 22,
concrete slab with 6 inches of granular subbase and a
and 10 feet for longitudinal joints 1, 2, and 3, respec­
drainage system that removes water in less than 1 day
tively Thus, for the 9-inch slab, the maximum recom­
This structure will reach its terminal serviceability in
mended tie bar spacing for each joint (as determined
approximately 23 years Thus, to complete the design
from Part II, Figures 3 13 and 3 14) are as follows:
strategy, an overlay must be designed to carry the
remaining 18-kip ESAL traffic over the last 12 years
of the analysis period Maximum
Distance
Spacing (inches)
Long. to the Closest
Joint Free Edge, 1/2-inch s/8-inch
1.3 REINFORCEMENT DESIGN No. x (feet) Bars Bars
1 12 36 48
The nomograph for estimating the percent of steel 20 30
2 22
reinforcement required in a jointed reinforced con­ 42
3 10 48
crete pavement is presented in Figure 3 8 in Part II
The inputs to this nomograph for this design example
are as follows
If '/2-inch tie bars are used, the minimum overall
(1) slab length, L = 30 feet length should be 25 inches If 5/s-inch tie bars are
(2) steel working stress, fs = 45,000 psi used, then the minimum overall length should be 30
(3) friction factor, F = 1 5 inches
Appendix I 1-9

Direction of Traffic

12' 12 ' 12 ' 10'

Lane 2 Lane 3 Tied

PCC
TJ 00
0 Shoulder

C O)
"O
UJ
o
0
*o
05
c
o D
o

x2 - 22'

10 '

Figure 1.3. Plan View of Three-Lane Facility Showing Longitudinal Joint Positions and
Corresponding Distances to Nearest Free Edge
1-10 Design o f Pavement Structures

Dowel B ar Design

Dowel bar design is described in Section 2 4 4 of

Part II For this design example, the dowel spacing is
12 inches and the dowel length is 18 inches The
dowel diameter is equal to slab thickness (9 inches)
multiplied by Vs, or 1 and Vs inches
 APPENDIX J
ANALYSIS UNIT DELINEATION BY
CUMULATIVE DIFFERENCES

J .l APPROACH FUNDAMENTALS cumulative area caused by the overall average project

response It should be recognized that the slopes
A relatively straightforward and powerful analyti­ (derivatives) of the cumulative area curves are simply
cal method for delineating statistically homogenous the response value for each unit fa , r2, and r3) while
units from pavement response measurements along the slope of the dashed line is the overall average re­
a highway system is the cumulative difference ap­ sponse value of the entire project length considered
proach While the methodology presented is funda­ At the distance, x, the cumulative area of the average
mentally easy to visualize, the manual implementation project response is
for large data bases becomes very time-consuming
and cumbersome However, the approach is presented
because it is readily adaptable to a computerized Ax = f r dx (J 2)
(microcomputer) solution and graphic analysis This Jo
approach can be used for a wide variety of measured
pavement response variables such as deflection, serv­
with
iceability, skid resistance, pavement distress-severity
indices, etc
Figure J 1 illustrates the overall approach concept X, |* X 2 AX3

using the initial assumptions of a continuous and con­

stant response value fa) within various intervals (0 to
S
0
r, dx + I
Jxi
r2 dx + I
Jx2
r3 dx
Ax
x,, X! to x2, x2 to x3) along a project length From this 1 ~ Lp _ L
figure, it is obvious that three unique units having
different response magnitudes fa , r2, and r3) exist
along the project Figure J 1(a) illustrates such a and therefore
response-distance result If one were to determine the
trend of the cumulative area under the response- Ax = L p X At
distance plot, Figure J 1(b) would result The solid
line indicates the results of the actual response curves
Knowing both Ax and Ax allows for the determina­
Because the functions are continuous and constant
tion of the cumulative difference variable Zx from:
within a unit, the cumulative area, at any x, is simply
the integral or
Zx Ax Ax

A = f r, dx + f r2 dx (J 1) As noted in Figure J 1(b), Zx is simply the differ­

Jo Xi ence in cumulative area values, at a given x, between
the actual and project average lines If the Zx value is,
with each integral being continuous within the respec­ in turn, plotted against distance, x, Figure J 1(c)
results An examination of this plot illustrates that the
tive intervals
location of unit boundaries always coincides with the
location (along x) where the slope of the Zx function
(0 < x < xO and (x; < x < x2) changes algebraic signs (i e , from negative to posi­
\
tive or vice versa) This fundamental concept is the
ultimate basis used to analytically determine the
In Figure J 1(b), the dashed line represents the
boundary location for the analysis units

J -l
J-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

(a) 0
03
>
0/)
<
C
o
Q.
CO
0
CC
c
0
E
0
>

J L
x =0 x x0 x 3 = Lp

(b)

II
<

(c)

Figure J .l . Concepts of Cum ulative Difference A pproach to Analysis Unit Delineation

Appendix J J-3

J.2 APPLICATION TO DISCONTINUOUS rj = pavement response value of the ith

VARIABLES measurement,
r; = average of the pavement response values
The schematic figures shown in Figure J 1 are ob­ between the (i — 1) and ith tests, and
viously highly idealized In practice, measurements Lp = total project length
are normally discontinuous (point measurements),
frequently obtained at unequal intervals and never If equal pavement testing intervals are used:
constant, even within a unit In order to apply the
foregoing principles into a solution methodology
n n «t
capable of dealing with these conditions, a numerical
Zx = £ a, - - E a,
difference approach must be used The form of the Zx i= l n t i= l
function is:

J.3 TABULAR SOLUTION SEQUENCE

S-. B
Table J 1 is a table illustrating how the solution
Zx = S a, - E x,
i= 1 ~Ln
-'p i= 1 sequence progresses and the necessary computational
steps required for an unequal interval analysis The
table and entries should be self-explanatory
with

J.4 EXAMPLE ANALYSIS

In Part III, Chapter 3, actual results were shown for

(N o te : let r„ = r, for first interval) an analysis unit delineation based upon a field Skid
Number test survey SN(40) Table J 2 is a partial
where summary of the analysis, indicating only the initial
and final portions of the analysis for brevity This
n = the nth pavement response measurement, tabular data and solution forms the basis of the infor­
n, = total number of pavement response mation shown in Part III, Figures 3 3 and 3 4
measurements taken in project,
J-4 Design o f Pavement Structures
X
<
ft X
+
X <
O <3 +
U *
to ctf ’
* ^ X
+ +
to
_1_ X
cd ^ to : <
QO II + *^
+ [X h
K
o N
U
N
N
cd
cd
£
+ + <I_T
S t s m ..
. —s g 9
X II
o |^ W II *
2 o g +
+ to
A y cd* — <
A cd
<
0)
(J
9 X X
<N X
CO X
c
4> <
J- < < <
.*> ifcT it? iu T iJ r
II ii II II
*—
H C-J CO w
.2
cd cd cd
cd 3
331
S
9
uCN tT
^ 4) — C
rfJ
U !£ gf> ► o‘ tT + cs + <N
^ 2 C 2 II
4> S
C y -S 5 £ iC 1
4)
9
O'
4>
CA
9
JO
*•9 X X
9 < <
3 2 o>
C/3 3 o
X
+ +
u s i 9 X <
a t
4> 9 <! x
+ X
3 "o I S3 C/3 W <1 <
y g *4 s w X
+ +
i y <1
x X
< <
^ 1 1 -
I j S l ^ <
X
<1
X
<
X X
o -ts .a 2 . <
y fls
<N
_ "S «
N II I V
-3 I
aj
^ g §
w .2 *
cs
■8 3 1
y
Appendix J
xf tn x O NO o
if) xt N N Tf 8 in C S o
T f CS d
^ t" ~ ^ od + +
T j* iH iH iH + +
I I I I I II II II II
II II II II II Tf
,-—S
in' © in' o '
in p in p in
t^> Tf in in NO
Os O
Tf
r-*
s d d c i d ON ON o C ON
ON ON O n O n O n T f T f rt
w x
O Tf Tf Tf Tj- 1-H r“H
N T^H CO CO CO CO
co co co co co 1 11 11 1\
O 1
I I I I I Tf
in in in CO o in in in
CS © c s r - CS
r- cs CO NO ON CO
co so r- © in NO r- ON
CS CO rf NO CO CO CO CO
C S C S (N cs
in
>
(N ON
Tf
00 CQ W o in o in in o O in in in NO
o © CS cs r-
r* <u in © r - CS
o CO NO ON CO
— 53 U i-H CO NO r- d Tf in NO r- ON
® a<
W s
»—H cs CO T f NO CO CO CO CO CO
C S C S CS cs cs
o s,
_ ho>
S l2 o in in in o
>n m m in
in o in o o
r- © cs in in
'S 5 f Tf CO
T-H CO CO CO
i-H T
—H i-H
2
S ■«S 32 m m in © in © in o p
-N lS CO Tj- ti­ CO in ON NO NO
^ z cs CS c s cs cs C S cs C S
cs cs
U eiS
3
.m
J5
* , . 5£ #
k *< a
1 '**' ®» 5 in o in © in p in p in p
u © «“H h (s ri T f T f in in NO
§ i -s f"- r - C-* r** r -
cs u 3 °
>■4
pS
§ ^
w c si
"s
in in in in in in in in in in
j s s © © © © © o o d d d
^ fhl o-a
U
^-s »a
co £ «
~ § ■§ cc On O '— 1 <N
rf T f in in m
3 | 3
o 5 z
CO NO CO Tf NO r-* in oo v o oo
M N (S N N (N oi m n n
"S z 5
a
e in o in o in o in o in o
© ^ ^ (N ri T f T f in
in no
"3 -3 .g r">
r- r- r-
« “ §
 APPENDIX K
TYPICAL PAVEMENT DISTRESS
TYPE-SEVERITY DESCRIPTIONS

TYPICAL PAVEMENT DISTRESS tor The pieces are usually less than 1 foot on the
TYPE-SEVERITY DESCRIPTIONS longest side Alligator cracking occurs only in areas
that are subjected to repeated traffic loadings There­
This appendix contains general descriptions of the fore, it would not occur over an entire area unless the
major types of distress that may be encountered in entire area was subjected to traffic loading Alligator
both flexible (asphalt concrete) and rigid pavements cracking does not occur in asphalt overlays over con­
Also noted is a typical description of three distress crete slabs Pattern-type cracking which occurs over
severity levels associated with each distress This in­ an entire area that is not subjected to loading is rated
formation has been obtained from FHWA/RD-81/080 as block cracking which is not a load-associated dis­
study “A Pavement Moisture Accelerated Distress tress Alligator cracking is considered a major struc­
Identification System ” These descriptions are pro­ tural distress
vided as a guide to user agencies only and should not
be viewed as a standard method for distress type-
severity identification This information, along with
an estimate of the amount of each distress-severity Severity Levels:
combination, represents an example of the minimum
information needs required for a thorough condition L—Longitudinal disconnected hairline cracks run­
(distress) survey ning parallel to each other The cracks are not
N ote In presenting the distress types and severity spalled Initially there may only be a single crack
descriptions, the following letters refer to different in the wheel path (defined as Class 1 cracking at
levels of severity: AASHO Road Test)
M—Further development of low-severity alligator
L—Low M—Medium H—High
cracking into a pattern of pieces formed by cracks
that may be lightly surface-spalled Cracks may
be sealed (defined as Class 2 cracking at AASHO
K .l DISTRESS TYPES
Road Test)
(ASPHALT SURFACED PAVEMENTS)
H—Medium alligator cracking has progressed so that
pieces are more severely spalled at the edges and
Name of Distress: Alligator or Fatigue Cracking
loosened until the cells rock under traffic Pump­
ing may exist (defined as Class 3 cracking at
Description: AASHO Road Test)

Alligator or fatigue cracking is a series of inter­

connecting cracks caused by fatigue failure of the
asphalt concrete surface (or stabilized base) under re­ How to Measure:
peated traffic loading The cracking initiates at the
bottom of the asphalt surface (or stabilized base) Alligator cracking is measured in square feet or
where tensile stress and strain is highest under a wheel square meters of surface area The major difficulty in
load The cracks propagate to the surface initially as measuring this type of distress is that many times, two
one or more longitudinal parallel cracks After re­ or three levels of severity exist within one distressed
peated traffic loading, the cracks connect, forming area If these portions can be easily distinguished
many-sided, sharp-angled pieces that develop a pat­ from each other, they should be measured and re­
tern resembling chicken wire or the skin of an alliga­ corded separately However, if the different levels

K -i
K-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table K .l. Identification of Distress Types

Asphalt Surfaced Pavements Jointed Reinforced C oncrete Pavements
1 Alligator or Fatigue Cracking 1 Blow-Up
2 Bleeding 2 Corner Break
3 Block Cracking 3 Depression
4 Corrugation 4 Durability ( “ D ” ) Cracking
5 Depression 5 Faulting-Transverse Joints/Cracks
6 Joint Reflection Cracking from PCC Slab 6 Joint Load Transfer System Deterioration
7 Lane/Shoulder Dropoff or Heave 7 Seal Damage-Transverse Joints
8 Lane/Shoulder Joint Separation 8 Lane/Shoulder Dropoff or Heave
9 Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking 9 Lane/Shoulder Joint Separation
(Non-PCC Slab Joint Reflective) 10 Longitudinal Cracks
10 Patch Deterioration 11 Longitudinal Joint Faulting
11 Polished Aggregate 12 Patch Deterioration
12 Potholes 13 Patch Adjacent Slab Deterioration
13 Pumping and Water Bleeding 14 Popouts
14 Raveling and Weathering 15 Pumping and Water Bleeding
15 Rutting 16 Reactive Aggregate Distress
16 Slippage Cracking 17 Scaling and Map Cracking
17 Swell 18 Spalling (Transverse and Longitudinal Joint/Crack)
19 Spalling (Corner)
20 Swell
21 Transverse and Diagonal Cracks

of severity cannot be easily divided, the entire How to Measure:

area should be rated at the highest severity level
present Bleeding is measured in square feet or square me­
ters of surface area

Name of Distress: Bleeding

Name of Distress: Block Cracking

Description:

Bleeding is a film of bituminous material on the

pavement surface which creates a shiny, glass-like, Description:
reflecting surface that usually becomes quite sticky
Bleeding is caused by excessive amounts of asphalt Block cracks divide the asphalt surface into ap­
cement in the mix and/or low air void contents It proximately rectangular pieces The blocks range in
occurs when asphalt fills the voids of the mix during size from approximately 1 ft2 to 100 ft2 Cracking into
hot weather and then expands out onto the surface of larger blocks are generally rated as longitudinal and
the pavement Since the bleeding process is not re­ transverse cracking Block cracking is caused mainly
versible during cold weather, asphalt will accumulate by shrinkage of the asphalt concrete and daily temper­
on the surface ature cycling (which results in daily stress/strain
cycling) It is not load-associated, although load can
increase the severity of individual cracks from low to
Severity Levels: medium to high The occurrence of block cracking
usually indicates that the asphalt has hardened signifi­
No degrees of severity are defined Bleeding cantly Block cracking normally occurs over a large
should be noted when it is extensive enough to cause a proportion of pavement area, but sometimes will oc­
reduction in skid resistance cur only in nontraffic areas This type of distress dif­
Appendix K K-3

fers from alligator cracking in that alligator cracks Severity Levels:

form smaller, many-sided pieces with sharp angles
Also unlike block cracks, alligator cracks are caused L—Corrugations cause some vibration of the vehicle
by repeated traffic loadings and are, therefore, located which creates no discomfort
only in trafficked areas (i e , wheel paths) M—Corrugations cause significant vibration of the
vehicle which creates some discomfort.
H—Corrugations cause excessive vibration of the
vehicle which creates substantial discomfort, and/
Severity Levels: or a safety hazard, and/or vehicle damage, requir­
ing a reduction in speed for safety
L—Blocks are defined by (1) nonsealed cracks that
are nonspalled (sides of the crack are vertical) or
only minor spalling with a ‘A-inch (6 mm) or less
mean width, or (2) sealed cracks have a sealant in How to Measure:
satisfactory condition to prevent moisture in­
filtration Corrugation is measured in square feet or square
M—Blocks are defined by either (1) sealed or non­ meters of surface area Severity levels are determined
sealed cracks that are moderately spalled; (2) by riding in a mid- to full-sized sedan weighing ap­
nonsealed cracks that are not spalled or have only proximately 3,000 to 3,800 lb (13 3-16 9 kN) over
minor spalling, but have a mean width greater the pavement inspection unit at the posted speed limit
than approximately >A-inch (6 mm), or (3) sealed
cracks that are not spalled or have only minor
spalling, but have sealant in unsatisfactory
Name of Distress: Depression
condition
H —Blocks are well defined by cracks that are se­
verely spalled
Description:

Depressions are localized pavement surface areas

How to Measure: having elevations slightly lower than those of the
surrounding pavement In many instances, light de­
Block cracking is measured in square feet or square pressions are not noticeable until after a rain, when
meters of surface area It usually occurs at one sever­ ponding water creates “ birdbath” areas; but the
ity level in a given pavement section; however, any depressions can also be located without rain because
areas of the pavement section having distinctly differ­ of strains created by oil droppings from vehicles De­
ent levels of severity should be measured and recorded pressions can be caused by settlement of the founda­
separately tion soil or can be “ built in” during construction
Depressions cause roughness and when filled with
water of sufficient depth could cause hydroplaning of
vehicles
Name of Distress: Corrugation

Severity Levels:
Description:
L—Depressions cause some bounce of the vehicle
Corrugation is a form of plastic movement typified which creates no discomfort
by ripples across the asphalt pavement surface It oc­ M—Depressions cause significant bounce of the
curs usually at points where traffic starts and stops vehicle which creates some discomfort
Corrugation usually occurs in asphalt layers that lack H—Depressions cause excessive bounce of the vehi­
stability in warm weather, but may also be attributed cle which creates substantial discomfort, and/or
to excessive moisture in a subgrade, contamination of safety hazard, and/or vehicle damage, requiring a
the mix, or lack of aeration of liquid asphalt mixes reduction in speed for safety
K-4 Design o f Pavement Structures

How to Measure: corners of intersecting cracks; or (5) the crack

causes a significant bump to a vehicle
Depressions are measured in square feet or meters H—(1) Cracks are severely spalled and/or there exists
in each inspection unit Each depression is rated ac­ medium or high random cracking near the crack
cording to its level of severity Severity level is deter­ or at the corners of intersecting cracks, or (2) the
mined by riding in a mid- to full-sized sedan weighing crack causes a severe bump to a vehicle
approximately 3,000 to 3,800 lb (13 3-16 9 kN) over
the pavement inspection unit at the posted speed limit
How to Measure:

Name o f Distress: Joint Reflection Cracking Joint reflection cracking is measured in linear feet
from PCC Slab or meters The length and severity level of each crack
should be identified and recorded If the crack does
not have the same severity level along its entire length,
Description: each general portion should be recorded separately
The vehicle used to determine bump severity is a mid-
This distress occurs only on pavements having an to full-sized sedan weighing approximately 3,000 to
asphalt concrete surface over a jointed portland ce­ 3,800 lb (13 3-16 9 kN) over the pavement inspec­
ment concrete (PCC) slab and they occur at transverse tion unit at the posted speed limit
and longitudinal joints (i e , widening joints) This
distress does not include reflection cracking away
from a joint or from any other type of base (i e , Name of Distress: Lane/Shoulder Drop-off
cement stabilized, lime stabilized) as these cracks are or Heave
identified as “ Longitudinal and Transverse Crack­
ing ” Joint reflection cracking is caused mainly by
movement of the PCC slab beneath the asphalt con­ Description:
crete (AC) surface because of thermal and moisture
changes, it is generally not load-initiated However, Lane/shoulder drop-off or heave occurs wherever
traffic loading may cause a breakdown of the AC near there is a difference in elevation between the traffic
the initial crack, resulting in spalling A knowledge of lane and the shoulder Typically, the outside shoulder
slab dimensions beneath the AC surface will help to settles due to consolidation or a settlement of the
identify these cracks underlying granular or subgrade material or pumping
of the underlying material Heave of the shoulder may
occur due to frost action or swelling soils Drop-off of
granular or soil shoulder is generally caused from
Severity Levels:
blowing away of shoulder material from passing
trucks
L—Cracks have either minor spalling or no spalling
and can be sealed or nonsealed If nonsealed, the
cracks have a mean width of V4-inch (6 mm) or
Severity Levels:
less, sealed cracks are of any width, but their
sealant material is in satisfactory condition to
Severity level is determined by computing the mean
substantially prevent water infiltration No signif­
difference in elevation between the traffic lane and
icant bump occurs when a vehicle crosses the
shoulder:
crack
M—One of the following conditions exists: (1) cracks L V4-V2 in (6-13 mm)
are moderately spalled and can be either sealed or M '/2- I in (3-25 mm)
nonsealed of any width; (2) sealed cracks are not H > 1 in ( > 2 5 mm)
spalled or have only minor spalling, but the seal­
ant is in a condition so that water can freely infil­
trate; (3) nonsealed cracks are not spalled or are How to Measure:
only lightly spalled, but the mean crack width is
greater than '/4-inch (6 mm), (4) low-severity Lane/shoulder drop-off or heave is measured every
random cracking exists near the crack or at the 100 feet (30 m) in inches (or mm) along the joint The
Appendix K K-5

mean difference in elevation is computed from the by (1) a poorly constructed paving lane joint, (2)
data and used to determine severity level shrinkage of the AC surface due to low temperatures
or hardening of the asphalt, or (3) a reflective crack
caused by cracks beneath the surface course, includ­
Name of Distress: Lane/Shoulder ing cracks in PCC slabs (but not at PCC slab joints)
Joint Separation Transverse cracks extend across the pavement cen­
terline or direction of laydown They may be caused
by items (2) or (3) above These types of cracks are
Description:
not usually load-associated
Lane/shoulder joint separation is the widening of
the joint between the traffic lane and the shoulder,
generally due to movement in the shoulder If the joint
Severity Levels:
is tightly closed or well sealed so water cannot enter
(or if there is no joint due to full-width paving), then
L—Cracks have either minor spalling or no spalling,
lane/shoulder joint separation is not considered a
and cracks can be sealed or nonsealed If sealed,
distress If the shoulder is not paved (i e , gravel or
cracks have a mean width of 1U inch (6 mm) or
grass), then the severity should be rated as high If a
less, sealed cracks are of any width, but their
curbing exists, then it should be rated according to the
sealant material is in satisfactory condition to
width of the joint between the asphalt surface and
curb substantially prevent water infiltration No signif­
icant bump occurs when a vehicle crosses the
crack
Severity Levels: M—One of the following conditions exists (1) cracks
are moderately spalled and can either be sealed or
Severity level is determined by the mean joint nonsealed of any width; (2) sealed cracks are not
opening No severity level is counted if the joint is spalled or have only minor spalling, but the seal­
well sealed to prevent moisture intrusion ant is in a condition so that water can freely infil­
trate, (3) nonsealed cracks are not spalled or have
only minor spalling, but mean crack width is
L 0 0 4- 12 in (1-3 mm) greater than XU inch (6 mm), (4) low severity
M > 1 2 - 4 0 in ( > 3 - 1 0 mm) random cracking exists near the crack or at the
corners of intersecting cracks; or (5) the crack
H > 40 in ( > 1 0 mm) causes a significant bump to a vehicle
(also a nonpaved shoulder) H—(1) Cracks are severely spalled, and/or medium-
or high-random cracking exists near the crack or
at the corners of intersecting cracks, or (2) the
How to Measure:
crack causes a severe bump to a vehicle

Lane/shoulder joint separation is measured in

inches (or millimeters) at about 50 feet (15 2 m) inter­
vals along the sample unit The mean separation is
How to Measure:
used to determine severity level
Longitudinal and transverse cracks are measured in
linear feet or linear meters The length and severity of
Name of Distress: Longitudinal and Transverse
each crack should be identified and recorded If the
Cracking (Non-PCC Slab
crack does not have the same severity level along its
Joint Reflective)
entire length, each general portion of the crack having
a different severity level should be recorded sepa­
Description: rately The vehicle used to determine bump severity is
a mid- to full-sized sedan weighing approximately
Longitudinal cracks are parallel to the pavement’s 3,000 to 3,800 lb (13 3-16 9 kN) over the pavement
centerline or laydown direction They may be caused inspection unit at the posted speed limit
K-6 Design o f Pavement Structures

Name of Distress: Patch D eterioration Name of Distress: Potholes

Description: Description:

A patch is an area where the original pavement has A bowl shaped hole of various sizes in the pave­
been removed and replaced with either similar or dif­ ment surface The surface has broken into small
ferent material pieces by alligator cracking or by localized disintegra­
tion of the mixture and the material is removed by
traffic Traffic loads force the underlying materials
Severity Levels: out of the hole, increasing the depth

L—Patch is in very good condition and is performing

satisfactorily Severity Levels:
M—Patch is somewhat deteriorated, having low to
medium levels of any types of distress Area
H—Patch is badly deteriorated and soon needs re­ (ft2) <1 1-3 >3
placement (m2) < V3 Vs-l >1
Depth—in (mm)
<1 « 2 5 ) L L M
1-2 (25-50) M M H
How to Measure:
> 2 (>51) M H H
Each patch is measured in square feet or square
meters of surface area Even if a patch is in excellent
How to Measure:
condition, it is still rated low severity
Portholes are counted in number of holes of each
severity level in the inspection unit
Name of Distress: Polished Aggregate

Description: Name of Distress: Pumping and Water Bleeding

Aggregate polishing is caused by repeated traffic Description:

applications Polished aggregate is present when close
examination of a pavement reveals that the portion of Pumping is the ejection of water and fine materials
aggregate extending above the asphalt is either very under pressure through cracks under moving loads
small or there are no rough or angular aggregate As the water is ejected, it carries fine material result­
particles to provide good skid resistance ing in progressive material deterioration and loss of
support Several cases of pumping of stabilized base
materials have been observed for example Surface
Severity Levels: staining or accumulation of material on the surface
close to cracks is evidence of pumping Water bleed­
No degrees of severity are defined However, the ing occurs where water seeps slowly out of cracks in
degree of polishing should be significant in reducing the pavement surface
skid resistance before it is included as a distiess

Severity Levels:
How to Measure:
L—Water bleeding exists or water pumping can be
Polished aggregate is measured in square feet or observed when heavy loads pass over the pave­
square meters of surface area The existence of polish­ ment, however, no fines (or only a very small
ing can be detected by both visually observing and amount) can be seen on the surface of the pave­
running the fingers over the surface ment
Appendix K K-7

M —Some pumped material can be observed near by plastic movement in the mix in hot weather or
cracks in the pavement surface inadequate compaction during construction Signifi­
H—A significant amount of pumped material exists cant rutting can lead to major structural failure of the
on the pavement surface near the cracks pavement and hydroplaning potential Wear of the sur­
face in the wheel paths from studded tires can also
cause a type of “ rutting ”
How to Count:

If pumping or water bleeding exists anywhere in Severity Levels:

the sample unit, it is counted as occurring
Severity Mean Rut Depth Criteria
L V 4 - V 2 in (6-13 mm)
Name of Distress: Raveling and Weathering M > V2- I in (13-25)
H > 1 in ( > 25 mm)
Description:

Raveling and weathering are the wearing away of How to Measure:

the pavement surface caused by the dislodging of ag­
gregate particles (raveling) and loss of asphalt binder Rutting is measured in square feet or square meters
(weathering) They generally indicate that the asphalt of surface area, and its severity is determined by the
binder has hardened significantly mean depth of the rut To determine the mean rut
depth, a 4-foot ( 1 2 m) straightedge should be laid
across the rut and the maximum depth measured The
Severity Levels: mean depth should be computed from measurements
taken every 20 feet (6 m) along the length of the rut
L—Aggregate or binder has started to wear away but
has not progressed significantly
M—Aggregate and/or binder has worn away and the Name of Distress: Slippage Cracking
surface texture is moderately rough and pitted
Loose particles generally exist
H—Aggregate and/or binder has worn away and the Description:
surface texture is severely rough and pitted
Slippage cracks are crescent- or half-moon-shaped-
cracks generally having two ends pointed into the
How to Measure: direction of traffic They are produced when braking
or turning wheels cause the pavement surface to slide
Raveling and weathering are measured in square and deform This usually occurs when there is a low-
feet or square meters of surface area strength surface mix or poor bond between the surface
and next layer of pavement structure

Name of Distress: Rutting

Severity Levels:
Description:
No degrees of severity are defined It is sufficient
A rut is a surface depression in the wheel paths to indicate that a slippage crack exists
Pavement uplift may occur along the sides of the rut,
however, in many instances, ruts are noticeable only
after a rainfall, when the wheel paths are filled with How to Measure:
water Rutting stems from a permanent deformation in
any of the pavement layers or subgrade, usually Slippage cracking is measured in square meters or
caused by consolidation or lateral movement of the in square feet of surface area within the inspection
materials due to traffic loads Rutting may be caused unit
K-8 Design o f Pavement Structures

N am e of D istress: Swell slab at the bottom creating reduced joint contact area
The presence of “D ” cracking or freeze-thaw damage
also weakens the concrete near the joint resulting in
Description:
increased spalling and blow-up potential
Swell is characterized by an upward bulge in the
pavement’s surface A swell may occur sharply over a
small area or as a longer, gradual wave Either type of Severity Levels:
swell can be accompanied by surface cracking A
swell is usually caused by frost action in the subgrade L—Blow-up has occurred, but only causes some
or by swelling soil, but a swell can also occur on the bounce of the vehicle which creates no discom­
surface of an asphalt overlay (over PCC) as a result of fort
a blow-up in the PCC slab They can often be identi­ M—Blow-up causes a significant bounce of the vehi­
fied by oil droppings on the surface cle which creates some discomfort Temporary
patching may have been placed because of the
blow-up
Severity Levels: H—Blow-up causes excessive bounce of the vehicle
which creates substantial discomfort, and/or a
L—Swell causes some bounce of the vehicle which safety hazard, and/or vehicle damage, requiring a
creates no discomfort reduction in speed for safety
M—Swell causes significant bounce of the vehicle
which creates some discomfort
H—Swell causes excessive bounce of the vehicle
which creates substantial discomfort, and/or a How to Measure:
safety hazard, and/or vehicle damage, requiring
reduction in speed for safety Blow-ups are measured by counting the number
existing in each uniform section Severity level is de­
termined by riding in a mid- to full-sized sedan weigh­
How to Measure: ing approximately 3,000 to 3,800 lb (13 3-16 9 kN)
over the uniform section at the posted speed limit The
Swells within the inspection unit are measured in number is not as important as the fact that initial blow­
square feet or meters Severity level is determined by ups signal a problem with “ lengthening” or gradual
riding in a mid- to full-sized sedan weighing approxi­ downhill movement—and others should be expected to
mately 3,000 to 3,800 lb (13 3-16 9 kN) over the occur until the maximum distance is down to 1,000
pavement inspection unit at the posted speed limit feet between blow-ups, the distance required to de­
velop full restraint of an interior section

K .2 DISTRESS TYPES
(JOINTED REINFORCED Name of Distress: Corner Break
CONCRETE PAVEMENTS)

Name of Distress: Blow-up

Description:

Description: A corner break is a crack that intersects the joints

at a distance less than 6 feet (1 8 m) on each side
Most blow-ups occur during the spring and hot measured from the corner of the slab A corner break
summer at a transverse joint or wide crack Infiltra­ extends vertically through the entire slab thickness It
tion of incompressible materials into the joint or crack should not be confused with a corner spall, which
during cold periods results in high compressive intersects the joint at an angle through the slab and is
stresses in hot periods When this compressive pres­ typically within 1 foot (0 3 m) from the slab corner
sure becomes too great, a localized upward movement Heavy repeated loads combined with pumping, poor
of the slab or shattering occurs at the joint or crack load transfer across the joint, and thermal curling and
Blow-ups are accelerated due to a spalling away of the moisture warping stresses result in corner breaks
Appendix K K-9

Severity Levels: How to Measure:

L—Crack is tight (hairline) Well-sealed cracks are Depressions are measured by counting the number
considered tight No faulting or break-up of that exists in each uniform section Each depression is
broken corner exists Crack is not spalled rated according to its level of severity Severity level is
M—Crack is working and spalled at medium severity, determined by riding in a mid- to full-sized sedan
but break-up of broken corner has not occurred weighing approximately 3,000 to 3,800 lb (13 3-
Faulting of crack or joint is less than V2 inch (13 16 9 kN) over the uniform section at the posted speed
mm) Temporary patching may have been placed limit
because of corner break
H—Crack is spalled at high severity, the corner piece
has broken into two or more pieces, or faulting of Name of Distress: Durability (“D ”) Cracking
crack or joint is more than V2 inch (13 mm)
Description:

How to Measure: “ D ” cracking is a series of closely spaced cres­

cent-shaped hairline cracks that appear at a PCC pave­
Corner breaks are measured by counting the num­ ment slab surface adjacent and roughly parallel to
ber that exists in the uniform section Different levels transverse and longitudinal joints, transverse and lon­
of severity should be counted and recorded separately gitudinal cracks, and the free edges of pavement slab
Comer breaks adjacent to a patch will be counted as The fine surface cracks often curve around the inter­
“patch adjacent slab deterioration ” section of longitudinal joints/cracks and transverse
joints/cracks These surface cracks often contain cal­
cium hydroxide residue which causes a dark coloring
Name of Distress: Depression of the crack and immediate surrounding area This
may eventually lead to disintegration of the concrete
within 1 to 2 feet (0 30-0 6 m) or more of the joint or
Description: crack, particularly in the wheelpaths “ D ” cracking is
caused by freeze-thaw expansive pressures of certain
Depressions in concrete pavements are localized types of coarse aggregates and typically begins at the
settled areas There is generally significant slab bottom of the slab which disintegrates first Concrete
cracking in these areas due to uneven settlement The durability problems caused by reactive aggregates are
depressions can be located by stains caused by oil rated under “ Reactive Aggregate Distress ”
droppings from vehicles and by riding over the pave­
ment Depressions can be caused by settlement or
consolidation of the foundation soil or can be “built- Severity Levels:
in” during construction They are frequently found
near culverts This is usually caused by poor compac­ L—The characteristic pattern of closely spaced fine
tion of soil around the culvert during construction cracks has developed near joints, cracks, and/or
Depressions cause slab cracking, roughness, and hy­ free edges, however, the width of the affected
droplaning when filled with water of sufficient depth area is generally < 1 2 inch (30 cm) wide at the
center of the lane in transverse cracks and joints
The crack pattern may fan out at the intersection
Severity Levels: of transverse cracks/joints with longitudinal
cracks/joints No joint/crack spalling has oc­
L—Depression causes a distinct bounce of vehicle curred, and no patches have been placed for
which creates no discomfort “ D ” cracking
M—Depression causes significant bounce of the M—The characteristic pattern of closely spaced
vehicle which creates some discomfort cracks has developed near the crack, joint, or free
H—Depression causes excessive bounce of the vehi­ edge and: (1) is generally wider than 12 inch
cle which creates substantial discomfort, and/or a (30 cm) at the center of the lane in transverse
safety hazard, and/or vehicle damage, requiring a cracks and/or joints, or (2) low- or medium-
reduction in speed for safety severity joint/crack or corner spalling has devel-
K~10 Design o f Pavement Structures

oped in the affected area, or (3) temporary guide to determine the distress level of the crack
patches have been placed due to “ D ” cracking- Faulting is measured 1 foot in from the outside (right)
induced spalling slab edge on all lanes except the innermost passing
H—The pattern of fine cracks has developed near lane Faulting is measured 1 foot in from the inside
joints or cracks and (1) a high severity level of (left) slab edge on the inner passing lane If temporary
spalling at joints/cracks exists and considerable patching prevents measurement, proceed on to the
material is loose in the affected area; or (2) the next joint Sign convention + when approach slab is
crack pattern has developed generally over the higher than departure slab, — when the opposite oc­
entire slab area between cracks and/or joints curs Faulting never occurs in the opposite direction

How to Measure: Name of Distress: Joint Load Transfer System

Associated Deterioration
“ D ” cracking is measured by counting the number (Second Stage Cracking)
of joints or cracks (including longitudinal) affected
Different severity levels are counted and recorded
Description:
separately “ D ” cracking adjacent to a patch is rated
as patch-adjacent slab deterioration “ D ” cracking This distress develops as a transverse crack a short
should not be counted if the fine crack pattern has not distance (e g , 9 inches (23 cm)) from a transverse
developed near cracks, joints, and free edges Pop- joint at the end of joint dowels This usually occurs
outs and discoloration of joints, cracks, and free edges when the dowel system fails to function properly due
may occur without “ D ” cracking to extensive corrosion or misalignment It may also be
caused by a combination of smaller diameter dowels
and heavy traffic loadings
Name of Distress: Faulting of Transverse Joints
and Cracks
Severity Levels:
Description:
L—Hairline (tight) crack with no spalling or faulting
Faulting is the difference of elevation across a joint or well-sealed crack with no visible faulting or
or crack Faulting is caused in part by a buildup of spalling
loose materials under the approach slab near the joint M—Any of the following conditions exist, the crack
or crack as well as depression of the leave slab The has opened to a width less than 1 inch (25 mm),
buildup of eroded or infiltrated materials is caused by the crack has faulted less than V2 inch (13 mm),
pumping from under the leave slab and shoulder (free the crack may have spalled to a low- or medium-
moisture under pressure) due to heavy loadings The severity level; the area between the crack and
warp and/or curl upward of the slab near the joint or joint has started to break up, but pieces have not
crack due to moisture and/or temperature gradient been dislodged to the point that a tire damage or
contributes to the pumping condition Lack of load safety hazard is present, or temporary patches
transfer contributes greatly to faulting have been placed due to this joint deterioiation
H—Any of the following conditions exist a crack
with width of opening greater than 1 inch (25
Severity Levels: mm), a crack with a high-severity level of spall­
ing, a crack faulted V2 inch (13 mm) or more, or
Severity is determined by the average faulting over the area between the crack and joint has broken
the joints within the sample unit up and pieces have been dislodged to the point
that a tire damage or safety hazard is present

How to Measure:
How to Measure:
Faulting is determined by measuring the difference
in elevation of slabs at transverse joints for the slabs in The number of joints with each severity level are
the sample unit Faulting of cracks are measured as a counted in the uniform section
Appendix K K -ll

Name of Distress: Joint Seal Damage of shoulder Typically, the outside shoulder settles due to
Transverse Joints consolidation or a settlement of the underlying granu­
lar or subgrade material or pumping of the underlying
Description: material Heave of the shoulder may occur due to frost
action or swelling soils Drop-off of granular or soil
Joint seal damage exists when incompressible ma­ shoulder is generally caused from blowing away of
terials and/or water can infiltrate into the joints This shoulder material from passing trucks
infiltration can result in pumping, spalling, and blow­
ups A joint sealant bonded to the edges of the slabs
protects the joints from accumulation of incompressi­ Severity Levels:
ble materials and also reduces the amount of water
seeping into the pavement structure Typical types of Severity level is determined by computing the mean
joint seal damage are (1) stripping of joint sealant, difference in elevation between the traffic lane and
(2) extrusion of joint sealant, (3) weed growth, (4) shoulder
hardening of the filler (oxidation), (5) loss of bond to
the slab edges, and (6) lack or absence of sealant in
the joint How to Measure:

Lane/shoulder drop-off or heave is measured in the

Severity Levels: sample unit at all joints when joint spacing is > 5 0
feet (15 m), at every third joint when spacing is < 5 0
L—Joint sealant is in good condition throughout the feet (15 m) It is also measured at mid-slab in each
section with only a minor amount of any of the slab measured at the joint The mean difference in
above types of damage present Little water and elevation is computed from the data and used to deter­
no incompressibles can infiltrate through the mine severity level Measurements at joints are made
joint 1 foot (0 3 m) from the transverse joint on the depar­
M—Joint sealant is in fair condition over the entire ture slab only on the outer lane/shoulder
surveyed section, with one or more of the above
types of damage occurring to a moderate degree
Water can infiltrate the joint fairly easily, some Name of Distress: Lane/Shoulder Joint
incompressibles can infiltrate the joint Sealant Separation
needs replacement within 1 to 3 years
H—Joint sealant is in poor condition over most of the
sample unit, with one or more of the above types Description:
of damage occurring to a severe degree Water
Lane/shoulder joint separation is the widening of
and incompressibles can freely infiltrate the joint
the joint between the traffic lane and the shoulder,
Sealant needs immediate replacement
generally due to movement in the shoulder If the joint
is tightly closed or well sealed so that water cannot
How to Measure: easily infiltrate, then lane/shoulder joint separation is
not considered a distress
Joint sealant damage of transverse joints is rated
based on the overall condition of the sealant over the
entire sample unit Severity Levels:

No severity-level is recorded if the joint is tightly

Name of Distress: Lane/Shoulder Drop-off sealed
or Heave
L—Some opening, but less than or equal to 0 12 inch
(3 mm)
Description: M—More than 0 12 inch (3 mm) but equal to or less
than 0 4 inch (10 mm) opening
Lane/shoulder drop-off or heave occurs when there H—More than 0 4 (10 mm) opening Gravel or sod
is a difference in elevation between the traffic lane and shoulders are rated as high
K-12 Design o f Pavement Structures

How to Measure: Severity Levels:

Lane/shoulder joint separation is measured and re­ Severity level is determined by measuring the max­
corded in inches (or mm) near transverse joints and at imum fault
mid-slab The mean separation is used to determine
the severity level
How to Measure:

Name o f Distress: Longitudinal Cracks Where the longitudinal joint has faulted, the length
of the affected area and the maximum joint faulting is
recorded
Description:

Longitudinal cracks occur generally parallel to the Name of Distress: Patch Deterioration
centerline of the pavement They are often caused by (including replaced slabs)
improper construction of longitudinal joints or by
a combination of heavy load repetition, loss of foun­
dation support, and thermal and moisture gradient Description:
stresses
A patch is an area where a portion or all of the
original slab has been removed and replaced with a
Severity Levels: permanent type of material (e g , concrete or hot-
mixed asphalt) Only permanent patches should be
L—Hairline (tight) crack with no spalling or faulting, considered
or a well-sealed crack with no visible faulting or
spalling
M—Working crack with a moderate or less severity Severity Levels:
spalling and/or faulting less than V2 inch (12
mm) L—Patch has little or no deterioration Some low
H—A crack with width greater than 1 inch (25 mm), a severity spalling of the patch edges may exist
crack with a high-severity level of spalling, or a Faulting across the slab-patch joints must be less
crack faulted V2 inch (13 mm) or more than V4 inch (6 mm) Patch is rated low severity
even if it is in excellent condition
M—Patch has cracked (low-severity level) and/or
How to Measure: some spalling of medium-severity level exists
around the edges Minor rutting may be present
Faulting of 'U to 3U inch (6-19 mm) exists Tem­
Cracks are measured in linear feet (or meters) for
porary patches may have been placed because of
each level of distress The length and average severity
permanent patch deterioration
of each crack should be identified and recorded
H—Patch has deteriorated by spalling, rutting, or
cracking within the patch to a condition which
requires replacement
Name of Distress: Longitudinal Joint
Faulting
How to Measure:

Description: The number of patches within each uniform section

is recorded Patches at different severity levels are
Longitudinal joint faulting is a difference in eleva­ counted and recorded separately Additionally, the ap­
tion of two traffic lanes measured at the longitudinal proximate square footage (or meters) of each patch
joint It is caused primarily by heavy truck traffic and and type (i e , PCC or asphalt) is recorded All
settlement of the foundation patches are rated either L, M, or H
Appendix K K-13

Name of Distress: Patch Adjacent Slab one popout per square yard (square meter) over the
Deterioration entire slab area before they are counted as a distress

Description:
How to Measure:

Deterioration of the original concrete slab adjacent

The density of popouts can be determined by count­
to a permanent patch is given the above name This
ing the number of popouts per square yard (square
may be in the form of spalling of the slab at the slab/
meter) of surface in areas having typical amounts
patch joint, “ D ” cracking of the slab adjacent to the
patch, a corner break in the adjacent slab, or a second
permanent patch placed adjacent to the original patch
Name of Distress: Pumping and Water Bleeding

Severity Levels: Description:

Severity levels are the same as that described for Pumping is the movement of material by water
the particular distress found A second permanent pressure beneath the slab when it is deflected under a
patch placed adjacent to a previously placed perma­ heavy moving wheel load Sometimes the pumped
nent patch will be rated here as medium severity Tem­ material moves around beneath the slab, but often it is
porary patches placed because of this deterioration ejected through joints and/or cracks (particularly
will also be rated here as medium severity along the longitudinal lane/shoulder joint with an
asphalt shoulder) Beneath the slab there is typically
particle movement counter to the direction of traffic
How to Measure: across a joint or crack that results in a buildup of loose
materials under the approach slab near the joint or
crack Many times some fine materials (silt, clay,
The number of permanent patches with distress in
sand) are pumped out, leaving a thin layer of relatively
the original slab adjacent to the patch at each severity
loose clean sand and gravel beneath the slab, along
level will be counted and recorded separately Addi­
with voids causing loss of support Pumping occurs
tionally, the type of patch (AC or PCC) and distress
even in pavement sections containing stabilized sub­
will be recorded separately
bases
Water bleeding occurs when water seeps out of
joints and/or cracks Many times it drains out over the
Name of Distress: Popouts shoulder in low areas

Description:
Severity Levels:
A popout is a small piece of concrete that breaks
L—Water is forced out of a joint or crack when trucks
loose from the surface due to freeze-thaw action,
pass over the joints or cracks, water is forced out
expansive aggregates, and/or nondurable materials
of the lane/shoulder longitudinal joint when
popouts may be indicative of unsound aggregates and
trucks pass along the joint, or water bleeding ex­
“ D ” cracking Popouts typically range from approxi­
ists No fines can be seen on the surface of the
mately 1 inch (25 mm) to 4 inches (10 cm) in diameter
traffic lanes or shoulder
and from V2-inch to 2-inches (13-51 mm) deep
M—A small amount of pumped material can be ob­
served near some of the joints or cracks on the
surface of the traffic lane or shoulder Blow holes
Severity Levels: may exist
H—A significant amount of pumped materials exist
No degrees of severity are defined for popouts The on the pavement surface of the traffic lane or
average popout density must exceed approximately shoulder along the joints or cracks
K-14 Design o f Pavement Structures

How to Measure: Severity Levels:

If pumping or water bleeding exists anywhere in L—Crazing or map cracking exists, the surface is
the sample unit, it is counted as occurring at highest in good condition with no scaling
severity level as defined above M/H—Scaling exists

How to Measure:
Name of Distress: Reactive Aggregate Distresses
Scaling and map cracking or crazing are measured
by area of slab in square feet or meters
Description:

Reactive aggregates either expand in alkaline envi­ Name of Distress: Spalling (Transverse and
ronments or develop prominent siliceous reaction Longitudinal Joint/Crack)
rims in concrete It may be an alkali-silica reaction or
an alkali-carbonate reaction As expansion occurs, the
cement matrix is disrupted and cracks It appears as a Description:
map-cracked area, however, the cracks may go deeper
into the concrete than in normal map cracking It may Spalling of cracks and joints is the cracking, break­
affect most of the slab or it may first appear at joints ing, or chipping (or fraying) of the slab edges within 2
and cracks feet (0 6 m) of the joint/crack A spall usually does
not extend vertically through the whole slab thickness
but extends to intersect the joint at an angle Spalling
usually results from (1) excessive stresses at the joint
Severity Levels: or crack caused by infiltration of incompressible ma­
terials and subsequent expansion, (2) disintegration of
Only one level of severity is defined If alkali- the concrete from freeze-thaw action of “ D ” crack­
aggregate cracking occurs anywhere in the slab, it is ing, (3) weak concrete at the joint (caused by honey­
counted If the reaction has caused spalling or map combing), (4) poorly designed or constructed load
cracking, these are also counted transfer device (misalignment, corrosion), and/or (5)
heavy repeated traffic loads

How to Measure:
Severity Levels:
Reactive-aggregate distress is measured in square
feet or square meters L—The spall or fray does not extend more than 3
inches (8 cm) on either side of the joint or crack
No temporary patching has been placed to repair
the spall
Name of Distress: Scaling and Map Cracking M—The spall or fray extends more than 3 inches
or Crazing (8 cm) on either side of the joint or crack Some
pieces may be loose and/or missing, but the
spalled area does not present a tire damage or
Description: safety hazard Temporary patching may have been
placed because of spalling
Scaling is the deterioration of the upper Vs to H—The joint is severely spalled or frayed to the ex­
V2 inch (3-13 mm) of the concrete slab surface Map tent that a tire damage or safety hazard exists
cracking or crazing is a series of fine cracks that ex­
tend only into the upper surface of the slab surface
Map cracking or crazing is usually caused by over- How to Measure:
finishing of the slab and may lead to scaling of the
surface Scaling can also be caused by reinforcing Spalling is measured by counting and recording
steel being too close to the surface separately the number of joints with each severity
Appendix K K-15

level If more than one level of severity exists along a Name of Distress: Swell
joint, it will be recorded as containing the highest
severity level present Although the definition and se­ Description:
verity levels are the same, spalling of cracks should
not be recorded The spalling o f cracks is included in A swell is an upward movement or heave of the slab
rating severity levels o f cracks Spalling of transverse surface resulting in a sometimes sharp wave The
swell is usually accompanied by slab cracking It is
and longitudinal joints will be recorded separately
usually caused by frost heave in the subgrade or by an
Spalling of the slab edge adjacent to a permanent
expansive soil Swells can often be identified by oil
patch will be recorded as patch adjacent slab deterio­
droppings on the surface as well as riding over the
ration If spalling is caused by “ D ” cracking, it is
pavement in a vehicle
counted as both spalling and “ D ” cracking at appro­
priate severity levels
Severity Levels:

L—Swell causes a distinct bounce of the vehicle

which creates no discomfort
Name of Distress: Spalling (Corner)
M—Swell causes significant bounce of the vehicle
which creates some discomfort
H—Swell causes excessive bounce of the vehicle
Description: which creates substantial discomfort, and/or a
safety hazard, and/or vehicle damage, requiring a
reduction in speed for safety
Corner spalling is the raveling or breakdown of the
slab within approximately 1 foot (0 3 m) of the corner
However, corner spalls with both edges less than How to Measure:
3 inches (8 cm) long will not be recorded A corner
spall differs from a corner break in that the spall usu­ The number of swells within the uniform section
are counted and recorded by severity level Severity
ally angles downward at about 45° to intersect the
levels are determined by riding in a mid- to full-sized
joint, while a break extends vertically through the
sedan weighing approximately 3,000 to 3,800 lb
slab Corner spalling can be caused by freeze-thaw
(13 3-16 9 kN) over the uniform section at the posted
deterioration, “ D ” cracking, and other factors
speed limit

Name of Distress: Transverse and

Severity Levels: Diagonal Cracks

L—Spall is not broken into pieces and is in place and Description:

not loose Linear cracks are caused by one or a combination
M—One of the following conditions exists Spall is of the following: heavy load repetition, thermal and
broken into pieces, cracks are spalled, some or all moisture gradient stresses, and drying shrinkage
pieces are loose or absent but do not present tire stresses Medium- or high-severity cracks are work­
damage or safety hazard, or spall is patched ing cracks and are considered major structural dis­
H—Pieces of the spall are missing to the extent that tresses They may sometimes be due to deep-seated
the hole presents a tire damage or safety hazard differential settlement problems (NOTE Hairline
cracks that are less than 6 feet (1 8 m) long are not
rated )

How to Measure:
Severity Levels:
Corner spalling is measured by counting and re­ L—Hairline (tight) crack with no spalling or faulting,
cording separately the number of corners spalled at a well-sealed crack with no visible faulting or
each severity level within the sample unit spalling
K-16 Design o f Pavement Structures

M—Working crack with low- to medium-severity level How to M easure:

of spalling, and/or faulting less than 1h inch (13
mm) Temporary patching may be present The number and severity level of each crack should
H—A crack with width of greater than 1 inch (25 be identified and recorded If the crack does not have
mm), a crack with a high-severity level of spall­ the same severity level along the entire length, the
ing, or a crack faulted V2 inch (13 mm) or more crack is rated at the highest severity level present
Cracks in patches are recorded under patch deteri­
oration
 APPENDIX L
DOCUMENTATION OF DESIGN PROCEDURES

Ll.O INTRODUCTION The following improvements to Chapter 5 are nec­

essary if the Guide’s overlay design procedures are to
This appendix provides documentation for the de­ be accepted by State and local agencies
velopment of the revised AASHTO overlay design
(1) Simplification of the procedures for practical
procedures This work was conducted under NCHRP
use by practicing engineers,
Project 20-7/Task 39
(2) Clearer descriptions of the procedures for eas­
ier understanding and implementation,
(3) Improved adaptability of the overlay thickness
design procedures to local conditions to pro­
L l.l PROBLEM STATEMENT duce more reasonable results,
(4) Addition of guidelines on such items as reflec­
A need has been identified to modify Chapter 5 of tion crack control, joint design, and pre-over-
Part III of the 1986 AASHTO G uide f o r D esign o f lay repair needs, overlay design for composite
P avem ent Structures (1 ) This chapter of the Guide pavements, and
addresses the subject of overlay design for pavement (5) Complete documentation of the procedures
rehabilitation
Pavement overlay design procedures presented in
the current Chapter 5 of the Guide are not being used L I,2 OBJECTIVE
by most State highway agencies Because the develop­
ment of the procedures was not fully documented, The objective of this research work is to modify
they are perceived to be complex and confusing Chapter 5 of Part III of the AASHTO G uide f o r D e ­
When applied to specific pavements that are candi­ sign o f Pavem ent Structures so that the Guide’s pave­
dates for overlay, the procedures yield inconsistent ment overlay design procedures will yield valid and
and questionable results Among the concerns ex­ acceptable designs
pressed about the current procedures are

(1) The “ remaining life” factor, which has a sig­

L I.3 APPROACH
nificant influence on overlay thickness, is ex­
tremely complex and has a questionable basis
The overlay design procedures presented in Chap­
(2) No guidelines are given for determination of ter 5 utilize the structural deficiency approach, in
future required structural capacity (SNf or Df) which the effective structural capacity of the existing
for a specific project design pavement is determined and then subtracted from the
(3) Limited or no provisions or guidelines are future required structural capacity as determined from
given for reflective crack control, pre-overlay the AASHTO flexible and rigid pavement design
repair, overlay type feasibility, subdrainage, equations This concept was retained to maintain com­
widening and lane additions, reinforcement patibility between Parts II and III of the Guide and to
and joint design for concrete overlays, separa­ keep the procedure relatively simple Development of
tion layers for unbonded overlays, and overlay a more sophisticated mechanistic approach to overlay
design for composite pavements design was not within the scope of this limited con­
(4) No guidelines are given for relating backcalcu­ tract Nondestructive deflection testing for characteri­
lated subgrade resilient modulus values to zation of the existing pavement is recommended, to
the resilient modulus value included in the the extent appropriate within the framework of these
AASHTO flexible pavement design equation empirical design procedures.

L-l
L-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

The primary focus of the revision effort was to grade Any errors made in determining SNf will pro­
modify the overlay design procedures to make them duce errors in the determination of the required
simpler and more complete It is essential, however, overlay thickness
that agencies desiring to use these overlay design pro­ Tables L2 1 and L2 2 provide a summary of the
cedures calibrate and adjust them as necessary to pro­ original and extended performance models for AC
duce designs which are appropriate for their local pavement and for jointed reinforced (JRCP) and
conditions As stated in Part I, Chapter 1, “ The Guide jointed plain (JPCP) concrete pavement (referred to
by its very nature cannot possibly include all the site- collectively as JCP) Continuously reinforced con­
specific conditions that occur in each region of the crete pavement (CRCP) was not tested at the AASHO
United States It is therefore necessary for the user to Road Test It is included by assuming an appropriate
adapt local experience to the use of the Guide ” This value for the J load transfer factor
statement applies even more to overlay design than to
new pavement design
Several States submitted overlay design projects to L2.1 O RIG IN A L AASHO ROAD TEST
assist in verifying and improving the procedures A PERFO RM A N CE M ODELS (1960)
total of seventy-four examples were developed to dem­
onstrate and validate the procedures These results At the end of the AASHO Road Test, the perform­
were very useful in improving many aspects of the ance data were used to develop empirical regression
overlay design procedures The overlay design exam­ models that predicted the number of axle loads (single
ples are documented in Reference 37 and tandem) of a given weight that a pavement could
carry from construction (Initial Serviceability Index)
to the end of its service life (Terminal Serviceability
L 2.0 OVERVIEW O F T H E AASHTO Index) Tables L2 1 and L2 2 show the AASHO Road
DESIGN M ODELS AND Test variables in the original AC and PCC pavement
ASSUM PTIONS models

The current AASHTO overlay design procedure

has its roots in the original prediction models devel­
L2.1.1 Quality Control
oped at the AASHO Road Test foi new asphalt con­
crete (AC) and jointed Portland cement concrete
Construction quality control was very good at the
(PCC) pavements A knowledge of the original
AASHO Road Test
models and the subsequent modifications made to
them is very imp 01 tant in an overlay design procedure
which is based upon them
The AASHTO Guide’s approach to overlay design L2.1.2 Section Length
is a “ structural deficiency” approach, in which the
structural capacity of the overlay must satisfy a defi­ Pavement sections were very short (120 to 240
ciency between the structural capacity required to sup­ feet) This length would not include the normal varia­
port future traffic over a specified design period and tions in subgrade along a typical highway project
the existing pavement’s effective structural capacity
For AC pavement, for example, the structural overlay
thickness is determined from the following equation L2.1.3 M aterials

A single source of AC, PCC, crushed limestone

S N 0j = aoi * D ol = S N f - S N eff (2 1)
base and gravel-sand subbase was utilized The prop­
erties of these materials had a major effect on the
The overlay thickness required to satisfy the struc­ performance of the pavements For example, the sub­
tural deficiency of the existing pavement is highly de­ base contained a high percentage of plastic fines,
pendent upon SNf for flexible pavement or Df for rigid which resulted in substantial pumping for the concrete
pavement, which is determined according to the pro­ pavements, and a reduction in subbase modulus for
cedures for new design given in Part II of the Guide, the asphalt pavements. Some special short sections of
as if a new pavement were being constructed (of the asphalt and cement-treated base were constructed and
existing and overlay material) on the existine sub­ tested
Appendix L L-3

Table L2.1. Summary of Concrete Pavement Design Factors Included in Original

and Extended Performance Prediction Models in the AASHTO Guide
Model Design Factors
1960 Original AASHO 1 Slab thickness
Road Test 2 Number and magnitude single- or tandem-axle loads
3 Initial serviceability index
4 Terminal serviceability index
1961 Extension 5 Modulus of subgrade reaction
6 PCC modulus of elasticity
7 PCC Poisson’s ratio
8 PCC modulus of rupture
9 Axle load equivalency factors
1972 Extension 10 J factor recommended for CRCP and unprotected corner design
11 Joint design recommendations
12 Reinforcement design procedures
1981 Extension 13 Safety factor to reduce design MR
1986 Extension 14 Drainage adjustment factor
15 Loss of support adjustment factor
16 J factor for different load transfer systems
17 Design reliability level
18 Resilient modulus for subgrade
19 Environmental serviceability loss

Table L2.2. Summary of Asphalt Concrete Pavement Design Factors Included in Original
and Extended Performance Prediction Models in the AASHTO Guide
Model Design Factors
1960 Original 1 Thickness of AC surface, crushed stone base, and sand-gravel subbase
Road Test 2 Number and magnitude of single- oi tandem-axle loads
3 Initial serviceability
4 Terminal serviceability index
5 Structural coefficients for AC surface layer
6 Structural coefficients for granular, asphalt-treated and cement-treated base
1961 Extension 7 Soil support scale
8 Axle load equivalency factors
9 Regional climatic factor
1986 Extension 10 Granular layer drainage adjustment factor
11 Correlations between moduli and structural coefficients for surface, base, and subbase
12 Design reliability level
13 Resilient modulus for subgrade
14 Environmental serviceability loss
L-4 Design o f Pavement Structures

L2.1.4 Com binations of Layers L 2.1.9 Axle Loads and Tire Pressure

For both AC and PCC pavements, specific combi­ Only one type and weight of axle was applied to
nations of materials and orders of layers were used each traffic lane Maximum tire pressure for the
The performance models based upon these data relate heaviest loads was about 85 psi
specifically to those material combinations Other
combinations or orders, such as very thick AC over
subgrade or a single base layer, or PCC over a stabi­
lized base, were not included at the AASHO Road L2.1.10 Subdrainage
Test
No subdrainage system existed at the AASHO
Road Test for either concrete or asphalt pavements
Base and subbase layers were daylighted Many of the
L2.1.5 Subgrade AC pavements at the Road Test failed during the
spring thaw period, and many of the PCC pavements
The subgrade was an A-6 soil with CBR ranging failed due to extensive pumping and loss of support
from 2 to 4 and k-value of about 45 psi in the spring
The resilient modulus of this soil as determined in the
laboratory using unconfined repeated loading at a de­
viator stress of 6 psi was approximately 3,000 psi L2.2 LIMITATIONS OF ORIGINAL
when tested at about one percent wet of optimum PERFORMANCE MODELS
moisture content (7)
The following describes some limitations of the
original performance models developed from the
Road Test data
L 2.1.6 Climate

The climate of northern Illinois, the site of the

AASHO Road Test, is characterized by about 30 L2.2.1 Serviceability-Traffic Relationship
inches of rain annually and depth of frost penetration
of about 30 inches The number of freeze-thaw cycles A fundamental assumption behind the AASHO
at the subbase level is about 12 per year Road Test model is that loss in PSI is only caused by
traffic While this may be reasonable for the two-year
duration of the Road Test, pavement performance for
L2.1.7 Dowels and Reinforcement actual in-service pavements is not always dependent
solely upon traffic, particularly when environmental,
All concrete pavement joints had uncoated dowels material and construction factors are contributing sig­
and were spaced at 15 feet for JPCP and 40 feet for nificantly to loss of serviceability
JRCP Reinforcement in the JRCP was welded wire
fabric There were no undowelled joints and no
skewed joints
L2.2.2 Initial Serviceability

Pavement performance started from an Initial PSI

L2.1.8 Time and Traffic averaging 4 2 for AC and 4 5 for JCP at the AASHO
Road Test Pavements constructed today can be built
The length of test was only two years and the num­ smoother
ber of actual load applications was 1 1 million or less
in each lane The pavements experienced mainly load-
associated damage (cracking and rutting) No long­
term observation of the effects of age and climate on L2.2.3 Terminal Serviceability
pavement condition (e g , cracking and ravelling on
AC, “ D ” cracking and joint spalling on JCP) was Pavement performance was assumed to end when a
possible given the short duration of the test pavement reached a PSI of 1 5
Appendix L L-5

L2.2.4 Present Serviceability Index (PSI) service for 14 years on 1-80 during the extended
Equations AASHO Road Test Many of the transverse cracks
opened up (from joint lock-up due to dowel corrosion)
The PSI of all pavements was calculated from and deteriorated, even on the very thick slabs This
models for AC and JCP that included the following was not observed on the shorter-jointed JPCP
factors
(1) Mean of the slope variance, SV, in the two
wheelpaths L2.2.8 Scatter of Data
(2) JCP cracking, C, as total linear feet of class 3
and class 4 cracks per 1,000 square feet of Because of random variations in the observed data,
pavement area (class 3 is a crack opened or there were differences between the average predic­
spalled 0 25 inch or more over at least half of tions from the models and the actual performance of
the crack length, and class 4 is a crack which individual sections Analysis of the residuals showed
has been sealed) that for PCC pavements the scatter corresponds ap­
(3) AC cracking, C, as linear feet per 1,000 square proximately to ± 12 percent of the slab thickness
feet of pavement area given by the performance curves The mean absolute
(4) AC rutting, RD, in inches, in the two wheel­ residual for log W (18-kip ESALs) was equal to 0 17
paths That is, the 90-percent confidence limits on log W are
(5) Patching in square feet per 1,000 square feet of log W — 0 34 and log W + 0 34 A similar statistic
pavement area was obtained for AC pavements

L2.2.5 Site-Specific Conditions

L2.3 EXTENDED PERFORMANCE
The models represent the combinations of loads, MODELS (1961)
pavement layer thicknesses, materials properties, and
joint and reinforcement designs that were studied at Since the original AASHO models were limited to
the AASHO Road Test only the original AASHO Road Test conditions, they
were not directly applicable to pavement design They
had to be “ extended” to make it possible for them to
L2.2.6 PSI Loss for Thicker Pavements handle additional design and traffic factors The addi­
tional factors added are listed in Tables 1 and 2 The
Serviceability trends for the lowest and next-to- following extensions were incorporated into the 1961
lowest levels of slab thicknesses were generally well Interim Guide (2, 3)
defined In certain cases, at least the beginning of a
loss trend could be detected for sections whose PCC
slab thickness or AC thickness was at the next-to-
highest level If the serviceability history of a section L2.3.1 Regional Factor
did not show any definite loss, then there was no way
to determine the magnitude of the rate of loss Such A regional factor was added to account for differ­
was the case for many PCC and AC pavements whose ences in climate from that in which the AASHO Road
thicknesses were at the highest level in any Road Test Test was conducted This regional factor was only de­
traffic lane veloped for AC pavements, and was not retained in the
1986 version

L2.2.7 Short-Term Versus Long-Term

Performance
L2.3.2. Soil Support Value
Reinforcement in concrete slabs was not found to
significantly affect JRCP performance over the two- A soil support scale was added to the AC perform­
year period of the Road Test However, the presence of ance model to make it possible to design for different
reinforcement and longer joint spacings proved to be soils than the AASHO Road Test soil This scale was
important factors after these pavements had been in replaced by resilient modulus in the 1986 version
L-6 Design of Pavement Structures

L 2.3.3 S tru ctu ral N um ber L2.3.5 PCC Load Transfer Factor

The structural number (SN) concept was formal­ The joint load transfer term (J factor) was assumed
ized (formerly called the thickness index in the origi­ to be 3 2 for the AASHO Road Test dowelled pave­
nal models) along with the structural layer ments Selection of different values of J and applica­
coefficients tion of this equation to unprotected (undowelled)
corners, and cracks with deformed reinforcement
(CRCP) has been recommended in the 1986 Guide
SN — UjDi 4* a2D2 -1- U3D3

where L2.3.6 Load Equivalency Factors

a ,, a2, a3 = structural coefficients of AC The concept of equivalency factors was developed

surface, base and subbase and incorporated into the 1962 Interim Guide It is
D j, D2, D3 = thickness of surface, base and assumed that mixed traffic load applications, includ­
subbase, inches ing various tandem-axle configurations on the toad
today, can be combined, by equivalency factois, to
The SN is actually a weighted thickness of flexible give equivalent 18-kip single-axle load applications
pavement The structural coefficients are regression which can be used in the perfoimance prediction
coefficients for the particular data analyzed Although models
the mean values were used for design, they varied
across the traffic loops For example, the a, coeffi­
cient was 0 30 for Loop 6 and 0 80 for Loop 2 They
L2.4 REVISED PERFO R M A N C E M ODELS
have also been shown to vary with layer thickness and
(1971, 1981)
position within the pavement structure (4 ) They are
not constant for any given material, and since they
A few additions were made during these years, as
relate to overall loss of serviceability, they probably
shown in Tables 1 and 2 In 1971, the Guide was
represent many different material properties and other
revised and some additional recommendations on ob­
environmental and construction conditions for a given
taining inputs were provided Furthei guidance on
pavement layer (e g , for AC layers, permanent defor­
joints and reinfoicement weie given (5) In 1981, a
mation and fatigue properties)
safety factor for reducing the concrete modulus of rup­
Mean values for the crushed stone base and gravel-
ture was added to increase the safety factor in designs
sand subbase were recommended, however, these var­
(6 )
ied widely over the different loops Tentative mean
values for asphalt-treated and cement-treated bases
were obtained from the few special wedge thickness
sections constructed with these materials L2.5 REVISED AND EXTENDED
Selection of the appropriate values for a deterio­ PERFO RM A N CE M ODELS (1986)
rated pavement layers is one of the challenges of over­
lay design Some major revisions were made in 1986 to both
the JCP and AC predictive models (i) Several major
factors were added to the performance models, as
shown in Tables 1 and 2 The 1986 models are those
L 2.3.4 PCC M aterial Properties
used in the current Chapter 5 AASHTO overlay design
procedure
Using the Spangler corner stress equation, the
Road Test model was modified and extended to in­
clude material properties for PCC pavements An as­
sumption was made that any change in the tensile L2.5.1 Resilient M odulus and k-Value
stress/strength ratio resulting from changes in physi­
cal constants E, k, D, and S'c would have the same One major change was the incorporation of the re­
effect on W as varying slab thickness would have on silient modulus as the subgrade soil property for de­
W according to the original model sign This replaced the soil support scale for AC
Appendix L L-7

pavements The method used to develop the resilient L 2.5.4 Load Transfer Factor
modulus scale is not rigorous and is subject to ques­
tion The load transfer J factor is recommended to vary
Examination of the revised AASHTO model indi­ for different joint designs This must be carefully as­
cates that the resilient modulus of the Road Test road­ sessed when designing overlays for jointed concrete
bed soil was assumed to be 3,000 psi Research by pavements
Elliott and Thompson (7) shows that the resilient
modulus varied widely above and below 3,000 psi
throughout the year at the Road Test Values of resil­ L2.5.5 Loss of S upport Considerations
ient modulus backcalculated from deflection data
must be adjusted to fit within the context of the 3,000 Loss of support procedures are provided that can
psi used in the flexible pavement prediction model result in very low k-values Foi overlay design, the
use of a large loss of support value may result in very
thick overlays

L 2.5.2 Reliability Level L2.5.6 Guidelines for Layer Coefficients

Another major addition was the incorporation of Further guidelines are given for obtaining struc­
the reliability concept into the design of both AC and tural coefficients of AC layers These are closely tied
JCP The design reliability and overall standard devia­ to the resilient moduli of those materials
tion were included in an attempt to account for all
errors and uncertainty associated with various as­
sumptions, random variation of performance predic­ L3.0 DETERM INATION O F SNf FOR
FLEX IB LE PAVEMENTS
tion, uncertainty in input values (such as traffic
loadings and material properties), and the desire to be
The total flexible pavement structural number re­
able to design for a higher confidence level The relia­
quired to cairy future traffic (SNf) is determined us­
bility concept is only applied to the number of ESALs
ing the procedure for new pavements presented in Part
a pavement can carry For example, a pavement de­
II, Chapter 3 of the 1986 AASHTO Guide (1) The
signed with a 50-percent reliability level would have a
inputs required foi SNf are
50-percent chance of not failing before the design traf­
fic was applied Designing for two times the design (1) Estimated future traffic ESALs, W ,8
traffic increases the reliability level to roughly 90 (2) Design reliability, R
percent, which results in a thicker pavement cross- (3) Overall standard deviation, S0
section This does not, however, result in a twofold (4) Effective roadbed resilient modulus, MR
improvement in all other aspects of the pavement’s (5) Design serviceability loss, A PSI
performance Climatic factors, for example, may For overlay design, special consideration is required
cause a substantial loss in PSI for selection of R, Sc, and MR

L3.1 DESIGN R ELIA B ILITY AND

OVERALL STANDARD DEVIATION
L 2.5.3 D rainage Factor
An overlay may be designed for different levels of
Drainage coefficients were added to the JCP and reliability using the procedures described in Part I,
AC design models A drainage coefficient value of 1 0 Chapter 4 for new pavements This is accomplished
is meant to reflect Road Test drainage conditions As through determination of the structural capacity (SNf
mentioned, .the subdrainage conditions at the Road or Df) required to carry traffic over the design period
Test were generally poor Values greater than 1 0 at the desired level of reliability
mean better drainage of the pavement, while values Reliability level has a large effect on overlay thick­
less than 1 0 mean worse drainage than existed at the ness as is shown in the many examples of overlay
AASHO Road Test design (37) Based on field testing projects, it appears
L-8 Design of Pavement Structures

that a design reliability level of approximately 95 per­ should be less in the point-by-point method No at­
cent gives overlay thicknesses consistent with those tempt has been made in the development of this proce­
recommended for most projects by State highway dure to identify appropriate values of SGfor these two
agencies, when the overall standard deviations recom­ approaches
mended in Parts I and II are used (37) There were
many projects where 95 percent did not give the rec­
ommended overlay thickness, however There are L3.2 DETERM INATION O F DESIGN M R
many situations for which it is desirable to design at a
higher or lower level of reliability, depending on the The design subgrade MRmay be determined by (1)
consequences of failure of the overlay The level of laboratory testing, (2) NDT backcalculation, (3) esti­
reliability to be used for different types of overlays mation from resilient modulus correlation studies, or
may vary, and should be evaluated by each agency for (4) original design and construction data Regardless
different highway functional classifications (or traffic of the method used, the design MR value must be
volumes) consistent with the value used in the design perform­
The designer should be aware that some sources of ance equation for the AASHO Road Test subgrade
uncertainty are different for overlay design than for This is especially important when MR is determined
new pavement design Therefore, the overall standard by NDT backcalculation The backcalculated value is
deviations recommended for new pavement design typically too high to be consistent and must be ad­
may not be appropriate for overlay design In fact, the justed If M r is not adjusted, the SNf value will not be
appropriate value for overall standard deviation may conservative and poor overlay performance can be ex­
vary by overlay type as well An additional source of pected
variation is the uncertainty associated with establish­ A subgrade MR may be backcalculated from NDT ,
ing the effective structural capacity (SNeff or Deff) of data using the following equation:
the existing pavement structure However, some
sources of variation may be less significant for overlay
design than for new pavement design (e g , estimation
of future traffic)
The sources of variation differ depending on the
specific methodology used for overlay design There where
are two general approaches to overlay design a uni­
form section approach and a point-by-point approach M r = backcalculated subgiade resilient
The uniform section approach is used when the entire modulus, psi
project (or each uniform section of the project) is P = applied load, pounds
treated as having a single SNeff, a single MR, and a dr = measured deflection at radial distance r,
single required SNf, and a single overlay thickness is inches
determined Generally, the overall approach is used r = radial distance at which deflection is
with the visual inspection/testing and the remaining measured, inches
life methods of determining SNeff However, the uni­
form section approach can also be used with NDT The derivation of this equation is presented in
data when SNeff and MR are determined using a “ rep­ Chapter 5 This equation for backcalculating MR is
resentative” deflection basin, or when a mean SNeff based on the fact that, at points sufficiently distant
and mean MR are determined for the deflection basins from the center of loading, the measured surface de­
measured The point-by-point approach is used when flection is almost entirely due to deformation in the
overlay thicknesses are determined for each location subgrade, and is also independent of the load radius
at which deflections are measured For practical purposes, the deflection used should be
SQ will differ for these two approaches to design as close as possible to the loading plate As the dis­
The prediction errors associated with traffic estima­ tance increases, the magnitude of the deflection de­
tion and pavement performance will be the same for creases and the effects of measurement error are
both approaches, and both approaches will include magnified However, the deflection used must also be
some variation due to the uncertainty associated with sufficiently far from the loading plate to satisfy the
the determination of SNeff However, for the point-by- assumptions inherent in the equation Analyses pre­
point approach, the error associated with variation of sented in Chapter 5 show that r should be at least 0 7
M r and SNeff will be significantly less As a result, S„ times ae, the effective radius of the stress bulb at the
Appendix L L-9

pavement/subgrade interface The equation for ae is the deflection measured closest to the loading plate at
presented in Chapter 5 which r was equal to or greater than 0 7ae Figure
The recommended method for determination of the L3 2 is a plot of the calculated MR values versus the
design MR from NDT backcalculation requires an ad­ laboratory values from the Shelby tube samples The
justment factor (C) added to make the value consistent calculated values aie greater than the laboratory val­
with the value used to represent the AASHO sub­ ues by a factoi of 4 8 on the average
grade A value for C of no more than 0 33 is recom­ For the second analysis, ILLI-PAVE was used to
mended for adjustment of backcalculated MR values to examine the effects of the AASHO subgrade stress-
design M R values dependency illustrated in Figure L3 1 ILLI-PAVE
The resulting equation is models the stress-dependency of cohesive soils as two
intersecting lines, as shown in Figure L3 3 Through
an iterative process, ILLI-PAVE selects modulus val­
ues for each subgrade element that match the pre­
dicted stress conditions for the element The model
inputs are the slopes of the two lines (Kt and K2), the
A subgrade MR value of 3,000 psi was used for the point of intersection (ERi and o Di) and a lower limit
AASHO Road Test soil in the development of the flex­ deviator stress that sets a maximum limit on the resil­
ible pavement performance model The AASHTO ient modulus Using the data from Figure L3 1, the
Guide and appendices (1, 8) do not indicate how or following values were selected to model the AASHO
why this value was selected, but it is consistent with subgrade ERi = 3,000 psi, o Di = 6 psi, K, = I 4
some of the test data on the AASHO soil reported by ksi/psi, K2 = 0 01 ksi/psi, and lower limit deviator
Thompson and Robnett (9) Their data are shown in stress = 2 psi (maximum possible MR = 8,600 psi)
Figure L3 1 From this it may be concluded that 3,000 The pavements analyzed by ILLI-PAVE had 3-inch
psi is appropriate for the AASHO soil when it is about and 5-inch AC surfaces (Eac = 500 ksi) and aggregate
1 percent wet of optimum and subjected to a deviator bases ranging in thickness from 8 inches to 22 inches
stress of about 6 psi or more However, the resilient (base M r = 9,000 0033) The loading was 9,000
modulus of the soil is shown to be quite stress-depen­ pounds on a 5 9-inch circular area (equivalent to a
dent, increasing rapidly for deviator stresses less than typical FWD deflection test) Examination of the
6 psi The subgrade deviator stress at the radial dis­ ILLI-PAVE output showed that, at radial distances that
tance used with Equation 3 1 will almost always be far would be used for backcalculation, the final resilient
less than 6 psi Thus, the subgrade modulus deter­ modulus of most subgrade elements was 8,600 psi, the
mined by backcalculation can be expected to be too maximum possible The lowest modulus was 7,130 psi
high to be consistent with the 3,000 psi used for the at a radial distance of 16 inches under the 3-inch AC/
AASHO subgrade 8-inch base pavement
This was confirmed by two methods The first anal­ Surface deflections computed by ILLI-PAVE for
ysis involved deflection data and resilient modulus the pavements described above were also used to pre­
tests on Shelby tube subgrade samples from the dict subgrade modulus values using Equation 3 1 De­
AASHO Road Test site The second analysis used the flections at radial distances ranging from 12 inches to
ILLI-PAVE finite element program (10, 11) 57 inches were used The calculated subgrade modu­
The deflection data and tests on the Shelby tube lus values ranged from 9,280 to 11,800 psi There was
samples were reported by Traylor (12) The deflec­ no pattern of the modulus increasing or decreasing
tions were measured several years after the Road Test, with the radial distance Using only the modulus for
on the Loop 1 pavements which were not trafficked the lowest r/ae ratio greater than 0 7, the mean calcu­
and are still in place The NDT device was the FHWA lated modulus was 9,806 psi
Thumper used in the impulse load mode The magni­ All of these results suggest that if appropriate de­
tude of loading was about 4,000 pounds The Shelby flection data were available from the AASHO Road
tube samples were taken shortly after the deflection Test the backcalculated subgrade resilient modulus
measurements The resilient moduli of the samples would be greater than 3,000 psi by a factor of at least
were measured in the laboratory using a deviator 3 Therefore, the value used for C in backcalculating
stress of 6 psi (essentially consistent with the AASHO M r for design should be no greater than 0 33 for cohe­
subgrade value) sive soils
For the first analysis, subgrade resilient modulus Further comparative data were obtained during the
values were calculated for each deflection site using field testing phase of this study (37) Data were ob-
 L-IO
Design o f Pavement Structures
16 i 1------- 1------- r

AASHO
Syrrbd W.X K.. Pd
14 0 0-0.5 -1.689 -0504 959 6.38
© 0 -0 5 -1551 -0.096 6.07 654
A 0+0.4 -1.785 -0.013 3.61 6.18
O 0+05 -1508 -0.019 357 656
X 0+1.3 -1.331 0.009 2.59 655
12 + 0+15 -0587 0.011 2.43 7.75

co .
10
Lf
Resilient Modulus,

0
0 5 10 15 2 0 2 5 3 0

Repeated Deviator Stress, <?0, psi

Figure L3.1. AASHQ Road Test Subgrade Resilient Modulus Reported by Thompson and Robnett (9)
 Backcalculated MR, ksi

o
CO
Appendix L

in
CM
o
CM
in
in
o
O

in

in
in
CO

CM
CM

CO
</)

L_
o
^ o
to
2^

Figure L3.2. Backcalculated Resilient Modulus Versus Laboratory Results on Shelby Tube Samples from the AASHO Road Test
L -ll

Site Plus Data from Two Additional States

L-12 Design o f Pavement Structures

ksi
Modulus,
Resilient

*D , Repeated Oeviator Stress, psi

Figure L3.3. Subgrade Resilient Modulus Stress-Dependency Model Used in ILLI-PAVE

Appendix L L-13

tained from several projects located in two States (3) Design PSI loss, A P S I
where the F W D was used at a load of 9,000 pounds (4) Load transfer factor, J
and the subgrade resilient modulus was then back- (5) P C C modulus o f rupture, S'
calculated using equation 3 1 Subgrade samples were (6 ) P C C elastic modulus, E pcc
then taken from the pavement and tested in the labora­ (7) Loss o f support factor
tory for resilient modulus at a deviator stress of about ( 8) Design reliability, R
6 psi The additional data are given below (9) Overall standard deviation, S 0
(10) Drainage factor, C d

Back- R a tio For overlay design, special consideration is re­

Lab calculated (Back- quired for the selection o f most of these inputs
S o il Mr M r , E q n . 3,1 calculated/
Type (psi) (psi) Lab )

A-2, A-4, A -6 7,000 25,000 3 6 L 4 .1 D E S IG N R E L I A B IL IT Y A N D

A -2 , A -6 4,800 22,700 4 7 O V E R A L L S T A N D A R D D E V IA T IO N
A-4 3,000 27,500 9 2
A -4, A-2-5 6,000 13,500 2 3 The discussion given in Section 3 1 on design re li­
A-7-6 6,000 19,600 3 3 ability and overall standard deviation for flexible
A-2-4 4,150 14,100 3 4 pavement overlay design also applies to overlay design
A-4 4,500 14,300 3 2 for rigid and composite pavements

The mean ratio o f field to lab m oduli from these

L 4 .2 D Y N A M IC k -V A L U E A N D P C C
tests is 4 2, or C = 0 24 These results are also plot­
E L A S T IC M O D U L U S F O R B A R E P C C
ted on Figure L 3 2
PAVEM ENTS
The analyses described here pertain to the fine­
grained, stress-sensitive soil at the A A S H O Road Test
The new rigid pavement design equation given in
site plus fine-grained soil from seven other projects
Part II of the Guide requiies characterization of the
N o attempt has been made in this study to investigate
subgrade and base layers supporting the P C C slab by
the relationship between backcalculated and labora­
an effective k-value The overlay design procedures
tory M r values for granular subgrades It may be that
presented in the 1986 G uide proposed that this effec­
backcalculated M R values for granular subgrades
tive k-value be determined using backcalculated val­
would not require a correction factor as large as is
ues for the elastic m oduli o f the base and subgrade
required for cohesive subgrades However, this sub­
This approach is not recommended in the revised
ject requires further research
overlay design piocedures Rather, direct backcalcula-
Users are cautioned that the resilient modulus
tion o f the effective k-value from N D T data is recom­
value selected has a very significant effect on the re­
mended, and a simple procedure for doing so is
sulting structural number determined Therefore, us­
provided
ers should be very cautious about using high resilient
A simple two-parameter approach to backcalcula-
modulus values, or their overlay thickness values w ill
tion of surface and foundation m oduli for a two-layer
be too thin
pavement system was proposed by Hoffm an and
Thompson in 1981 for flexible pavements (13) They
proposed the A R E A , given by the follow ing equation,
L 4 .0 D E T E R M IN A T IO N O F D f F O R R IG ID
to characterize the deflection basin
A N D C O M P O S IT E PA V EM EN T S

The slab thickness required to carry future traffic

(D f) was determined using the procedure for new
pavement design presented in Part II, Chapter 3 o f the
G uide The inputs required for D f are: (4 1)

(1) Estimated future traffic E S A L s , W 18

(2) Effective static k-value where
L-14 Design o f Pavement Structures

do = m axim um deflection at the center o f the

load plate, inches
dj = deflections at 12, 24, and 36 inches from
plate center, inches

A R E A has units o f length, rather than area, since

each o f the deflections is norm alized with respect to d 0
in order to remove the effect o f different load levels where
and to restrict the range of values obtained A R E A and
d0 are thus independent parameters, from which the d 0 = maximum deflection, inches
surface and foundation elastic m oduli may be deter­ P = load, pounds
mined Hoffm an and Thompson developed a nomo- y = E u le r’s constant, 0 57721566490
giaph for backcalculation o f flexible pavement surface
and subgrade m oduli from d0 and A R E A Figure L 4 2 was developed from Equation 4 4, for
The A R E A concept was subsequently applied to a load P = 9,000 pounds and a load radius a = 5 9
backcalculation o f P C C slab elastic modulus values inches For loads w ithin about 2,000 lbs of this value,
and subgrade k-values (14, 15) Further investigation the deflections d0, d 12, d24, and d 36 may be scaled
o f this concept by Barenberg and Petros (45) and by linearly to 9,000-lb deflections
Ioannides (16) has produced a forward solution proce­ W ith the effective k-value known, the slab E D 3 may
dure to replace the iterative and graphical procedures then be computed from the definition o f Ck (Equation
used previously T h is solution is based on the fact 4 2), and for a known or assumed slab thickness D ,
that, for a given load radius and sensor arrangement, a the concrete elastic modulus E may be determined
unique relationship exists between A R E A and the Figure L 4 3 was developed for determination of the
dense liq uid radius o f relative stiffness ( fk) of the slab E , assuming a Poisson’s ratio p = 0 15 for the
pavement system, in which the subgrade is character­ P C C and load radius a = 5 9 inches
ized by a k-value (18)

= JI F D3
^pcc^pcc /4 2) L4.3 STATIC k-VALUE
V 12(1 - p*cc)k
The k-value backcalculated from N D T data is a
dynamic k-value, whereas the required input to the
where new pavement design equation in Part II of the Guide
is a static k-value In an analysis o f A A S H O Road Test
Ck = dense liq u id radius o f relative stiffness, data, dynamic repeated-load k-values were found to
inches exceed static values by a factor o f 1 77 on the average
Epcc — P C C elastic modulus, psi (19) Foxworthy’s analysis o f data collected on seven
Dpcc — P C C thickness, inches A ir Force base pavements indicated that dynamic k-
Fpcc = P C C Poisson’s ratio values exceeded static values by a factor o f 2 3 on the
k = effective k-value, psi/inch average (15) Reducing backcalculated k-values by 2
has been found to produce very reasonable values for
Figure L 4 1 illustrates the relationship between static k-values It is recommended in the overlay de­
A R E A and f k for a = 5 9 in, the radius o f an F W D sign procedures that backcalculated k-values be d i­
load plate The follow ing equation for f k as a function vided by 2 to obtain static k-values for use in
o f A R E A was developed by H a ll (20) determining D f with Part II’s new pavement design
equation
4 387009
36 - AREA
1812 279133
(4 3)
[_ - 2 559340 L4.4 EFFECTIVE k-VALUE AND PCC
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR
W ith A R E A calculated from measured deflections AC/PCC PAVEMENTS
using Equation 4 1 , 1k may be obtained from Equation
4 3 or Figure L 4 1 The effective k-value may then be In order to apply the backcalculation procedure de­
obtained from Westergaard’s deflection equation (18) scribed in the preceding section to an existing A C /
AREA, inches
Appendix L
L-15

Figure L4.1. Relationship of AREA to f k (20)

Figure L4.2. Effective Dynamic k-Value Determination from d0 and AREA
Design o f Pavement Structures
PCC ED , E psi, D inches
Appendix L

Deflection basin AREA, inches

Figure L4.3. PCC Elastic Modulus Determination from k-Value, AREA, and Slab Thickness
L-17
L-18 Design o f Pavement Structures

PCC, deflections measured on the existing A C surface

log E ac = 5 553833 + 0 028829
must be adjusted to account for the influence of the
A C layer The procedure for doing so, which is taken
from Reference 20, is described in this section - 0 0 3 4 7 6 V , + 0 0 7 0 3 7 7 t]10cF W 6
+ 0 000005tp 3+° 49 82 5 log F)pfK-i (4 5)

_ 0 0 0 1 8 9 ( I 3 + 0 49825 lo g F ) p 0 5
L4.4.1 AC Elastic Modulus pi 1 Cp 49

A n existing A C / P C C pavement cannot properly be

modelled as a slab on grade, since the A C overlay
exhibits not only bending but also compression To
determine the amount o f compression that occurs in where
the A C overlay, the elastic modulus of the A C layer
must be determined The recommended method for E ac = elastic modulus o f A C , psi
determining E ac is to m onitor the temperature o f the P200 = percent aggregate passing the N o 200
A C m ix during deflection testing, and to use a rela­ sieve
tionship between E ac and temperature to assign a mod­ F = loading frequency, H z
ulus value to each deflection basin Vv = air voids, percent
The A C m ix temperature may be measured directly t|7o°F io6 = absolute viscosity at 70°F, 106 poise
during deflection testing by d rillin g a hole to the m id­ (e g , 1 for A C - 10, 2 for AC-20)
depth o f the overlay, inserting a liquid and a tempera­ Pac = asphalt content, percent by weight of
ture piobe into the hole, and reading the A C m ix m ix
temperature when it has stabilized This should be tp = A C m ix tempeiature, °F
done at least three times during each day’s testing, so
that a curve o f A C m ix temperature versus time may This can be reduced to a relationship between AC
be developed and used to assign a m ix tempeiature to modulus and AC m ix temperature foi a particular
each basin loading frequency (i e , approximately 18 H z for the
I f measured A C m ix temperatures are not available, F W D load duration of 25 to 30 m illiseconds) by as­
they may be approximately estimated from pavement suming typical values for the AC m ix parameters Pac,
surface and air temperatures using procedures devel­ Vv, P 2o0, and q For example, the AC m ix design used
oped by Southgate (21), Shell (22), the Asphalt Insti­ by one state has the follow ing typical values
tute (23), or H offm an and Thompson (13) Pavement
surface temperature may be monitored during deflec­ P20o = 4 percent
tion testing using a hand-held infrared sensing device Vv = 5 percent
which is aimed at the pavement The mean air temper­ t|70°f jo6 ~ 2 for A C-20
ature for the five days p rior to deflection testing, Pac — 5 percent
w hich is an input to some o f the referenced methods
for estimating m ix temperature, may be obtained from For these values and an F W D loading fiequency of 18
a local weather station or other local sources H z, the follow ing equation foi A C elastic modulus
Two methods for determining the A C elastic modu­ versus A C m ix tempeiature is obtained
lus as a function o f m ix temperature are provided in
the overlay design procedure The first method uses
log E ac = 6 451235 - 0 000164671 tj 92544 (4 6)
the Asphalt Institute’s equation for A C modulus as a
function o f m ix parameters, m ix temperature, and
loading frequency, given by Equation 4 6 This equa­ Each agency should establish its own relationship
tion, developed by W itczak for use in the Asphalt In­ for A C modulus versus temperature which is repre­
stitute’s Design M anual (M S-1) (23), is a refinement sentative o f the properties o f its A C mixes
o f work o rig in ally done for the Asphalt Institute by It should be noted that the Asphalt Institute’s equa­
Kallas and Shook (43) It is considered highly reliable tion for A C modulus applies to new mixes A C which
for dense-graded A C mixes with gravel or crushed has been in service for some years may have either a
stone aggregates (44) higher modulus (due to hardening o f the asphalt) or
Appendix L L-19

lower modulus (due to deterioration o f the A C , from Deflections were computed at the surface o f the A C
stripping or other causes) at any given temperature and the surface o f the P C C at radial offsets o f 0, 12,
The second method for establishing a relationship 24, and 36 inches Com pression in the A C layer, as
between E ac and m ix temperature involves repeated- indicated by the change in d 0 between the A C and P C C
load indirect tension testing (A S T M D 4123) of A C surfaces', often accounted for a significant portion of
cores taken from the in-service A C / P C C pavement the total deflection, depending p rim arily on the thick­
Testing at two or more temperatures (e g , 40, 70, and ness and modulus o f the A C , and to a lesser extent on
90°F) is recommended to establish points for a curve the A C / P C C interface condition For example, in sys­
o f log E ac versus temperature A C modulus values at tems with a thick A C layer (7 inches) and a low A C
any temperature may be interpolated from the labora­ modulus (250 ksi), more than 50 percent o f the total
tory values obtained at any two temperatures For ex­ deflection in the pavement occurred in the A C layer
ample, E ac values at 70° and 90 °F may be used in the The change in d 0 is significantly greater when the
follow ing equation to interpolate E ac at any tempera­ A C is not bonded to the P C C than when it is bonded
ture t°F: For each interface bonding condition, it was found
that the change in d 0 could be predicted very reliably
as a function o f the ratio o f the A C thickness to A C
. r- A °§ E ac70°F — l ° g E ac9o»F \
modulus (D ac/ E ac) These relationships were found to
'J be very insensitive to the ranges of other parameters
» ( f F - 70°F) + log E, , (4 7) investigated The follow ing equations were obtained
for these relationships

For purposes of interpreting N D T data, A C modu­

lus values obtained from laboratory testing o f cores AC/PCC BONDED
must be adjusted to account for the difference between
the loading frequency o f the test apparatus (typically 1 / d V 0798
decom press = ~ 0 0000328 + 121 5006 M M
to 2 H z) and the loading frequency o f the deflection
testing device (18 H z for the F W D ) This adjustment
(4 8)
is made by m ultiplying the laboratory-determined E ac
by a constant value which may be determined for each AC/PCC UNBONDED
laboratory testing temperature using the Asphalt Insti­
tute’s equation Field-frequency E ac values w ill typi­ /D \° 94551
decom press = ~ 0 00002132 + 38 6872 M M
ca lly be 2 to 2 5 times higher than lab-frequency
values

where
L4.4.2 Correction to d0
d0compress = A C compression at center o f load,
A n elastic layer program (BISAR ) was used to inches
m odel A C / P C C pavement structures over a broad D ac = A C thickness, inches
range o f parameters E ac = A C elastic modulus, psi

A C thickness 3 . 5 , and 7 inches

Using Equation 4 8 , the d0 of the P C C slab in the
A C modulus: 250, 500, 750, 1,000, and
A C / P C C pavement may be determined by subtracting
1,250 ksi
the compression which occurs in the A C surface from
P C C thickness 6 , 9, and 12 in
the d0 measured at the A C surface
P C C modulus 3 . 5 , and 7 m illio n psi
The interface condition is a significant unknown in
Subgrade modulus 6 , 24, and 42 ksi
backcalculation The A C / P C C interface is fu lly
A C / P C C interface bonded and unbonded
bonded when the A C layer is first placed, but how well
A load magnitude o f 9,000 pounds and a load ra­ that bond is retained is not known Exam ination of
dius o f 5 9 inches were used Poisson’s ratio values cores taken at a later time may show that bond has
used for the A C , P C C , and subgrade were 0 35, 0 15, been reduced or completely lost This is particularly
and 0 50 respectively The PCC/subgrade interface like ly i f stripping occurs at the A C / P C C interface If
was m odelled as unbonded the current interface bonding condition is not deter-
L-20 Design o f Pavement Structures

mined by coring, the bonding condition which is con­ having only aggregate interlock with no mechanical
sidered more representative o f the project may be load transfer, and thus are assigned a value o f 4 0, or
assumed sim ilar to an unprotected corner These values repre­
sent the extremes, and others may be chosen between
these values
L4.4.3 Computed AREA of PCC For C R C P, cracks are held reasonably tight with
reinforcement and should provide excellent load trans­
In the elastic layer analyses conducted, only d 0 was fer, corresponding to a J factor of 2 2 to 2 6 If, how­
found to change significantly between the A C and ever, the C R C P has been patched with either A C
P C C layers Differences in d 12, d24, and d 36 were very repairs or with unreinforced or poorly constructed
close to zero over the entire range o f parameters P C C repairs, the patch joints w ill have poor load
Therefore, the A R E A o f the P C C slab may be com ­ transfer Depending on the amount o f patching o f this
puted from Equation 4 1 using the d0 of the P C C slab type present, assignment o f a much higher J factor (as
determined as described above, and d )2, d24, and d 36 for an unprotected corner) is warianted
measured at the A C surface

L4.6 k-VALUE FOR PCC/AC

AREApcc _ * . + 2 (4 L ) + 2 ( £ ) OVERLAY DESIGN

The k-value that a P C C overlay slab w ill actually

+ (4 9)
\^ 0 pcc/_ experience in support when the slab is placed on an
A C pavement w ill typically be much lower than one
The P C C d 0 and A R E A , deteimined as described that might be calculated directly from deflections
above, may then be used to determine the P C C elastic measured on the A C surface (dividing plate pressure
modulus and effective dynam ic k-value The effective by total deflection) Ideally, backcalculation o f k-val-
k-value obtained is a dynam ic k-value, and should ues from N D T deflections measuied on P C C overlays
thus be divided by 2 to obtain an appropiiate static k- of A C pavements would give the best indication of the
value for use in determining D f from the rigid pave­ k-values that such overlays experience However,
ment design equation in Part II o f the Guide since this type of field data is not available, other
methods must be employed to select a k-value for use
in design of P C C oveilays of A C pavements
L4.5 LOAD TRANSFER FACTOR The method provided in the overlay design proce­
dure for estimation of a design static k-value involves
T h is factor relates to the ability of a jo in t to transfer backcalculation of the subgrade M R and effective
shear load Table L 2 6 in Section II of the Guide pro­ pavement modulus E p according to the piocedure de­
vides recommended values for J for new pavement scribed for A C pavements in Chapter 5 The effective
design that depend on the use o f dowels, A C or tied dynamic k-value is estimated from Figure 3 3 in Part
P C C shoulders and pavement type (jointed versus II, Section 3 2, using the backcalculated subgrade re­
C R C P ) For a concrete pavement being overlaid, the J silient modulus (M r ), the effective modulus of the
factor selected must reflect the ability of the existing pavement layers above the subgrade ( E p), and the total
joints (or cracks for C R C P ) to transfei load This ab il­ thickness of the pavement layers above the subgrade
ity may be measured through use o f N D T as described (D) It is emphasized that the backcalculated subgrade
in Part III, Section 3 5 4 of the Guide resilient modulus value used to estimate the effective
I f N D T is used to measure deflection load transfer dynamic k-value should not be adjusted by the C fac­
acioss representative joints, the results may be used to tor (e g , 0 33) which pertains to establishing the de­
select a J factor from some recommended values given sign M r for A C overlays o f A C pavements The
in Section 5 5 5, Step 4 of the overlay design proce­ effective dynamic k-value must be divided by 2 to
dure These values were selected based on the know l­ obtain the static k-value for design
edge that a new doweled pavement shows a measured The engineer should be aware that there are some
deflection load transfer across transverse joints of significant lim itations to this approach to determining
greater than 70 percent, and thus are assigned a value the design static k-value for P C C / A C design Figure
o f 3 2 as for a protected corner Measured load trans­ 3 3 in Part II, Section 3 2 was developed using an
fer values o f less than 50 percent are typical o f joints elastic layer computer program, without verification
Appendix L L-21

w ith field deflection data W h ile the approach de­ L ittle guidance is presently available for the selec­
scribed here for determining k-value may yield rea­ tion of layer coefficients for in-service pavement ma­
sonable values in some instances, it may yield terials It is generally accepted that the coefficients
unreasonably high values in other instances Further should be less than the coefficients used for the same
research o f the subject o f support for P C C overlays, materials in a new pavement and should reflect the
including deflection testing on in-service P C C / A C amount o f distress present A n exception to this might
pavements and backcalculating effective k-values, is be for unbound granular bases that show no signs of
strongly encouraged degradation or contamination o f fines
Despite the lack o f guidance in this area, Table
L 5 1 presents some suggested ranges for layer coeffi­
L5.0 DETERMINATION OF SNeff FOR cients of typical materials These values were selected
FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS based on lim ited inform ation on values used by some
agencies and organizations Each highway agency
The design o f A C overlays for A C pavements by the should review these values in light o f its own condi­
procedures presented in Chapter 5 requires the deter­ tions and experience and adopt its own set o f values
mination o f the effective structural number (SN eff) of The follow ing notes apply to Table L 5 1
the existing pavement Three methods of determina­ (1) A ll of the distress is as observed at the pave­
tion have been adopted ( 1) a visual survey/material ment surface
testing method, (2) a rem aining life method, and (3) (2) Patching all high-severity alligator cracking is
an N D T method Because o f the uncertainties associ­ recommended The A C surface and stabilized
ated with the determination of S N eff, the designer base layer coefficients selected should reflect
should not expect the three methods to give identical the amount of high-severity cracking remain­
estimates It is recommended that the designer use all ing after patching
three methods whenever possible and select the (3) In addition to evidence o f pumping noted dur­
“ best” estimate based on engineering judgement ing condition survey, samples o f base material
There is no substitute for solid experience and sound should be obtained and examined for evidence
judgement in overlay design o f erosion, degradation, and contamination by
fines, as w ell as evaluated for drainability, and
layer coefficients reduced accordingly
L5.1 SNeff BASED ON VISUAL (4) The percentage o f transverse cracking is deter­
SURVEY/MATERIAL TESTING mined as (linear feet o f cracking/square feet of
pavement) * 100
T h is method o f S N eff determination involves a com ­ (5) C oring and testing are recommended for evalu­
ponent analysis using the structural number equation ation o f all materials and aie strongly recom­
mended for evaluation of stabilized layers
(6 ) There may be other types of distress that, in
S N eff = a,D , + a2D 2m 2 + a3D 3m 3 (5 1) the opinion o f the engineer, would detract from
the performance o f an overlay These should be
where considered through an appropriate decrease of
the structural coefficient o f the layer exhibiting
the distress (e g , surface raveling of the AC,
D; = thicknesses of existing surface, base, and
stripping of an A C layer, freeze-thaw damage
subbase layers, inches
to a cement-treated base)
a; = corresponding structural layer coefficients
m; = drainage coefficients for granular base and
subbase
L5.2 SNeff BASED ON REMAINING LIFE
Guidance in determining drainage coefficients is
given in Part II, Table 2 4 o f the A A S H T O Guide In The remaining life approach to the determination of
selecting values for m 2 and m3, it should be noted that pavement structural capacity follows the fatigue con­
the poor drainage conditions for the base and subbase cept that repeated loads gradually damage the pave­
at the A A S H O Road Test would be given drainage ment and reduce the number of additional loads that
coefficient values of 1 0 can be carried to failure A t any given time, there may
1,-22 Design o f Pavement Structures

Table L5.1. Suggested Layer Coefficients for Existing AC Pavement Layer Materials
Material Surface Condition Coefficient
AC Surface L ittle or no alligator cracking and/or only low-severity 0 35 to 0 40
transverse cracking

< 10 percent low-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 25 to 0 35

< 5 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking

> 1 0 percent low-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 20 to 0 30

< 1 0 percent medium-severity alligator cracking and/or
> 5 -1 0 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking

> 10 percent medium-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 14 to 0 20

< 1 0 percent high-severity alligator cracking and/or
> 10 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking

> 10 percent high-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 08 to 0 15

> 10 percent high-severity transverse cracking

Stabilized Base L ittle or no alligator cracking and/or only low-severity 0 20 to 0 35

transverse cracking

< 1 0 percent low-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 15 to 0 25

< 5 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking

> 10 percent low-severity alligator cracking and/oi 0 15 to 0 20

< 1 0 pei cent m edium-seveiity alligator cracking and/or
> 5 -1 0 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking

> 1 0 percent medium-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 10 to 0 20

< 10 percent high-severity alligator cracking and/oi
> 10 percent medium- and high-severity transverse cracking

> 10 percent high-severity alligator cracking and/or 0 08 to 0 15

> 10 percent high-seveiity tiansverse cracking

Granular Base N o evidence of pumping, degradation, or contamination by fines 0 10 to 0 14

or Subbase
Some evidence o f pumping, degradation, or contamination by fines 0 00 to 0 10

be no directly observable indication of damage, but S N ol - SN f - F rl * S N eff (5 2 )

there is a leduction in structural capacity in terms of
future load-carrying capacity This reduced load-
where
carrying capacity must be considered in overlay
design
S N 0i = required structural number of overlay
A remaining life consideration was included in the SN f = required structural number to carry
1986 A A S H T O Guide, but the concept and applica­ future traffic
tion differed significantly from the approach used F rl = remaining life factor
with the current procedures In the 1986 Guide, the S N eff — effective structural number o f existing
remaining life was not used to determine the existing pavement
structural capacity Instead, a remaining life factor
(F r l ) was applied in the overlay thickness determina­ E llio tt (26) examined the remaining life factor as
tion equation independent o f and in addition to S N eff used in the 1986 Guide and demonstrated that the
The flexible pavement overlay equation was: application was flawed, as a result o f a compounding
Appendix L L-23

o f assumptions The result was that use of the F RL indicates that C F from the equation is reasonable for
term resulted in design inconsistencies E llio tt sug­ all values o f R L greater than 0 005 (C F = 0 42)
gested an alternative solution which followed most of However, when R L is zero, C F is also zero, which was
the original development o f the remaining life concept not considered to be realistic A s a result, a different
but eliminated the need for one assumption Using relationship was assumed for the 1986 Guide
this alternate approach, the F RL value is always 1 0 Nevertheless, this relationship, with one slight
H e subsequently recommended that the F RL term be m odification, is used in the current overlay design
removed from the overlay design equation Based on procedures for the determination of the effective
these findings, the F RL term was not included in the structural capacity based on remaining life The m odi­
revised overlay design procedures E llio tt’s paper is fication consists o f setting a m inim um C F value of
reproduced in Appendix M 0 5 Equation 5 5 may be used to calculate C F for all
Nevertheless, the general concept o f decreasing values o f R L greater than 0 05 For R L less than 0 05,
structural capacity and remaining life is valid There­ C F may be calculated using a straight line interpola­
fore, a remaining life method for determining effec­ tion between C F at R L — 0 05 and C F — 0 5 at R L =
tive structural capacity was adopted 0 00 Figure L 5 1 is a plot of both Equation 5 5 and
The remaining life approach adopted for these pro­ the proposed C F - R L curve for determination of effec­
cedures utilizes the w ork done in the in itial develop­ tive structural capacity
ment o f the remaining life concept for the 1986 Guide
That w ork introduced the idea o f a condition factor
defined by the follow ing equation L5.3 SNeff BASED ON NONDESTRUCTIVE
TESTING

Im plicit in the determination of structural number

CF = — 5 (5 3)
sc 0 from N D T data is an assumption of a relationship
between pavement stiffness and layer coefficients
where Such an assumption must be recognized as being a
substantial sim plification of a com plex problem
C F = condition factor Thus, the structural number determined from the
S C n = pavement’s structural capacity after n analysis should be viewed as only one approximation
E S A L applications o f the “ true” structural capacity o f the existing pave­
S C Q = pavement’s structural capacity when it ment
was new The procedure recommended for N D T determina­
tion of S N cff is based on the “ equal stiffness” ap­
F or flexible pavements, the S C terms are replaced proach described in A ppendix N N of the 1986 Guide
by the structural number (SN) I f at any point in time (8) However, instead o f requiring the backcalculation
C F is known, the effective structural number (S N eff) o f the modulus value of each pavement layer, the rec­
may be calculated ommended procedure uses the “ effective” modulus of
the total pavement structure above the subgiade The
advantages to this approach are that it is sim pler to
S N eff = C F * S N 0 (5 4)
apply and it does not suggest a level o f sophistication
that does not actually exist w ithin the context o f the
To make use o f this, a relationship between C F and structural number concept
remaining life (R L) is needed Such a relationship was Based on Appendix N N o f the 1986 Guide, the
developed for the 1986 G uide using the A A S H T O equation for the effective structural number is
pavement design equations E llio tt’s investigation
confirm ed this relationship The C F - R L relationship S N eff = 0 0045D J/Ep (5 6)
was:
where
C F = R L° 165 (5 5)
D = total thickness o f surface, base and
subbase, inches
Although developed for the 1986 Guide, this spe­ E p = effective modulus of the pavement, psi
c ific relationship was not used in the 1986 Guide The
discussion in Appendix C C o f the 1986 Guide (8) Figure L5 2 was developed from Equation 5 6
 L -24
Condition Factor, CF

Remaining Life, RL, percent

Figure L5.1. Relationship of Condition Factor to Remaining Life
Design o f Pavement Structures
SNeff
Appendix L

o
o
O
o

co
co
ID
10

in

in
in

in
CM
CM

Total pavement thickness D, inches

Figure L5.2. SNeff from NDT Method
L-25
L -26 Design o f Pavement Stiuctures

The method for determining the value o f E p is

based on the Boussinesq equation (27) for deflection
in an elastic half-space, as well as an assumption that
the pavement system can be represented as two lay­
ers— a subgrade o f infinite depth and having a modu­
The deflection in the pavement between z = 0 and z
lus M r , and a pavement having a total thickness D and
= D may then be determined by subtracting Equation
an effective modulus (E p) To sim plify the equations
with no significant loss o f accuracy, it is further as­ 5 10 from Equation 5 9
sumed that Poisson’s ratio (p) for both the subgrade
and pavement materials is 0 5 The Boussinesq equa­
tion for deflection at any depth (z) in an elastic h alf­
space assuming q = 0 5, as presented by Yoder (28),
is
(5 11)

The deflection in the subgrade is computed by

d = — 5 F b(z) (5 7)
transforming the two-layer system into an equivalent
one-layer system of subgrade material with modulus
M r To do so, the pavement o f thickness D and modu­
where
lus E p is represented by an equivalent thickness D e of
subgrade material The deflection at the top of the sub­
p = contact pressure, psi
grade is given by Boussinesq’s equation with z = D e
a = circular load radius, inches
E = elastic modulus, psi 1 5pa 1
(5 12)
~m 7
1 +
F b (z ) (5 8)

1 + 1-
a where

Boussinesq’s equation applies to deflection in a (5 13)

half-space, that is, a one-layer system In 1949, Ode-
m ark (29) presented an approximate method for
The total deflection (measured at the pavement sur­
determining deflection in a two-layer system, using
face) is then obtained by adding the pavement and
Boussinesq’s one-layer equation and the concept of
“ equivalent thickness” described in 1940 by Barber subgrade deflections (Equations 5 11 and 5 12) and
substituting in the definition o f D e (Equation 5 13)
(30) The deflection (d) measured at the surface at the
center of loading is assumed to be the sum of the
d = ds + d„ (5 14)
subgrade and pavement deflections
The deflection in the top layer is computed by
transforming the two-layer system into a one-layei
system of pavement material, that is, a homogeneous d0 = 1 5pa
half-space with modulus E p The deflection at the sur­
face is given by Boussinesq’s equation with z = 0
From Equation 5 7

1 5pa (5 15)
do — (5 9)

I f the total thickness o f the pavement is denoted by D ,

the deflection at depth D is given by Boussinesq’s If the pavement thickness D and subgrade resilient
equation with z = D modulus M r are known or assumed, the only un-
Appendix L L-27

known quantity in this equation is E p E p can quickly The m oduli of the A C were estimated using the
be solved by iteration using a computer or spread­ equation developed by the Asphalt Institute (25) and
sheet Figure L5 3 was developed from Equation 5 15 assuming typical m ix properties The resulting adjust­
for load radius a = 5 9 inches F or other load radius ment factors were plotted versus the A C temperature
values, Equation 5 15 should be used to determine These plots were subsequently used to develop two
En figures for temperature adjustment, one for granular
and asphalt-stabilized base pavements (Figure L 5 4)
and one for cement- and pozzolanic-base pavements
L5.4 Temperature Adjustment (Figure L 5 5)

Because the stiffness o f A C materials change sig­

nificantly with temperature, d 0 w ill vary depending L5.5 DETERMINATION OF SUBGRADE
upon the temperature o f the A C layers at the time of MODULUS FOR SNeff
testing For purposes o f com parison o f E p along the DETERMINATION
length o f a project, the measured d 0 values should be
adjusted to a single reference temperature Further­ The subgrade modulus that is to be used in equa­
more, i f S N eff i s t0 be determined by the N D T method, tion 5 15 should also be determined from the N D T
the reference temperature for adjustment o f d 0 should data However, this value of M R is not necessarily the
be 68 °F, to be consistent with the procedure for new same as the value that is used to determine the total
A C pavement design described in Part II of the Guide required structural number of the pavement (S N f)
The adjustment to d0 is based on the ratio of predicted The design M R must be consistent with the value used
deflections in the design performance equation for the A A S H O
Road Test subgrade The reader is referred to Chapter
3 for a discussion of the determination o f the design
d 0(68 ) M r from N D T data
T(t) = (5 16)
do(t) A simple method for estimating the subgrade mod­
ulus from deflections measured at the surface o f a
layered pavement structure has been proposed by U l-
where lid tz (31, 32) The method is based on the follow ing
two observations

T(t) = temperature adjustment factor

(1) A s distance away from the load increases,
d 0(68 ) = d 0 at 68 °F compression o f the layers above the subgrade
d0(t) = d 0 at testing temperature t°F
becomes less significant to the measured de­
flection at the pavement surface
Elastic layer analyses were used to develop adjust­ (2) A s distance away from the load increases, the
ment factors for the follow ing pavement parameters approximation o f a distributed load by a point
load improves
A C thickness 2, 4, 6 , 8 , and 12 inches
A C modulus (temperature) The first obseivation may be restated to say that at
2,000 ksi (30°F) some sufficiently large radial distance from the ap­
plied load, the deflection measured at the pavement
1,300 ksi (50°F)
surface is equal to the deflection at the top of the
670 ksi (68 °F)
subgrade, and thus depends entirely on the elastic
360 ksi (85°F)
properties of the subgrade, regardless o f the number,
132 ksi (105°F)
thickness, and elastic properties o f the overlying
55 ksi (120°F) layers
Granular base 0 and 12 inches, The second observation resulted from a com pari­
E = 30 ksi son o f deflections predicted by the elastic layer pro­
Cement-stabilized base 0 and 10 inches, gram B IS A R in a layered pavement stiucture at
E = 850 ksi various radial distances from the center of a distrib­
Subgrade modulus 5, 10, and 20 ksi uted circular load with deflections predicted at the
L-28 Design o f Pavement Structures

o
CO

ID
to

o
ID
CO
0)

d(
jC
in
o

Deflection
c

S Q

Maximum
CO
CO
ID 0
CO c

of E p/ M R from
O £
CO JC

Determination
ID
CM 0
E
o 0
CM >
CO
a
Figure L5.3.
ID 7=
1- CO

. |2

ID

O
O
 Temperature Adjustment Factor
Appendix L

O
^
o

o
o
o

o
o
00

IO
O
O
0>

CO

CO
CM

o
<
3
■o

k.
0)
k_

Q)

CO
CO

Q)
<D

.Q>
E
<D
O)

Q.
L -29

Figure L5.4. d0 Adjustment for AC Mix Temperature for Granular and Asphalt-Treated Base Pavements
 L-30
Temperature Adjustment Factor

CM
CO
CO
o
O
O

lO
o
o
o

o
o
O)

CO
CO

CO
CM

o
^

<
a
3
h.

(0
*-•
1_
(I)
"O
Q)

E
a>
0>
Q)

0>

Figure L5.5. d0 Adjustment for AC Mix Temperature for Cement- and Pozzolanic-Treated Base Pavements
Design o f Pavement Structures
Appendix L L-31

same distance by the Boussinesq equation for deflec­ 0 24P

Md — (5 23)
tion in a one-layer system at points away from the drr
center o f the load:

U llid tz stated that this equation should be used with

deflections measured at distances greater than the “ ef­
dr = * [2(1 - H) + cos 20] (5 17)
2 7 iR M R fective” thickness (D e) o f the pavement The 1986
A A S H T O Guide contained the same equation and rec­
ommended that the distance be greater than the
where
effective radius (ae) o f the stress bulb at the subgrade/
pavement interface W ith the subgrade Poisson’s ratio
dr = deflection at distance r from the applied
equal to 0 5, the equation for the effective radius is
load, inches
M
- Poisson’s ratio o f subgrade
P load, pounds
Mr = elastic modulus o f subgrade, psi ae = (5 24)
r = radial distance from load, inches
z = depth, inches

For practical purposes, the deflection used should

R 2 = z2 + (5 18) be as close as possible to the loading plate A s the
distance increases, the magnitude o f the deflection de­
creases and the effect o f measurement error is magni­
cos 0 = - (5 19)
fied Analyses were performed to determine how
close the deflection could be without introducing a
serious error in the subgrade modulus determination
Substituting in the values shown above for R and cos Deflection basins were generated using an elastic layer
0, Equation 5 17 may be written as: program The total pavement thicknesses ranged from
10 to 36 in and the A C thicknesses ranged from 2 to
16 in Deflections at various radial distances were
1 P(1 + H) „
2(1 M1) "b 2 , 2 used to calculate a subgrade modulus using Equation
Mr 2t i V z 2 + r2 z + r
5 23 The calculated modulus values were compared
(5 20) with the values used in the elastic layer analyses
The ratios of calculated/actual modulus values are
plotted in Figure L 5 6 versus the ratio o f radial dis­
Since the pavement surface deflection dr at this radial tance to the effective radius of the stress bulb (r/ae)
distance r is the same as the deflection o f the sub­ Based on the analysis it is concluded that the deflec­
grade, the load P may be considered to be applied at tion used for subgrade modulus determination should
the surface o f the subgrade W ith z = 0, Equation be from a distance greater than or equal to 0 7 times
5 20 reduces to: ae It should further be noted that no temperature ad­
justment is needed in determining M R since the deflec­
tion used is due only to subgrade deformation
P(1 ~ d2)
dr = (5 21)
7ir M R

L 5 .6 AC O VERLAY O F FRACTU RED PCC

w hich may then be rearranged to solve for the sub­ SLABS
grade modulus M r :
A ll three different fractured slab techniques were
placed in a separate section to be designed using fle x i­
P(1 ~ F 2)
M r = (5 22 ) ble pavement design procedures The selection of
Jirdr
overlay thickness for break/seat, crack/seat and rub­
blize/compact techniques presents a relatively new
Assum ing the subgrade Poisson’s ratio p = 0 5, this challenge for the pavement designer The use o f the
equation reduces to A A S H T O pavement performance equations for the se-
 L-32 Design o f Pavement Structures

3 .0 0 -
E s t im a t e d / A c t u a

2.00 -

* *
♦#

* +** **+ 4
4
Mr Ratio,

1.00 * »
TTV
jk.
* * ’**♦ * **

0 .0 0 H — i— i— i— i— i— i— r— i— i— i— i— i— i— i— |— i— i— i— i— |— i— i— i— r - 1 — i— r
0 .0 0 0 .5 0 1 .0 0 1 .5 0 2 .0 0 2 .50
Radial D ista n c e Ratio, r/ae
Figure L5.6. Influence of Radial Distance on the Accuracy of Backcalculated MR Values
Appendix L L-33

lection o f the overlay thickness for these projects lay is placed The use o f rubblization is recommended
results in another level o f extrapolation beyond the for JR C P due to its ability to break slab continuity
A A S H O Road Test database
R ubblizin g can be used on a ll types o f P C C pave­
ments in any condition It is particularly recom­ L6.0 DETERMINATION OF Deff FOR RIGID
mended for reinforced pavements Fracturing the slab AND COMPOSITE PAVEMENTS
into pieces less than 12 inches reduces the slab to a
high-strength granular base Recent field testing of L6.1 Deff BASED ON VISUAL
several rubblized projects showed a wide range in SURVEY/MATERIAL TESTING
backcalculated modulus values among different pro­
jects, from less than 100,000 psi to several hundred The effective slab thickness, D eff, represents a slab
thousand psi (20, 38, 46), and within-project coeffi­ thickness that has been adjusted to consider several
cients o f variation o f as much as 40 percent (20, 38) important factors that w ill affect the life o f the overlay
C ra ck and seat is used only with J P C P and involves The overlay design procedure attempts to “ protect”
cracking the slab into pieces typically one to three feet the existing pavement and subgrade from future traffic
in size Recent field testing o f several cracked and load damage by providing increased structural capac­
seated J P C P projects showed a wide range in back- ity roughly equal to a new pavement required to carry
calculated modulus values among different projects, the anticipated traffic The A A S H T O rigid perform ­
from a few hundred thousand psi to a few m illio n psi ance equation was developed at the A A S H O Road Test
(34, 36, 38, 47, 48), and within-project coefficients of from performance o f jointed concrete pavements, not
variation of 40 percent or more (38) Reference 38 for overlays To u tilize this equation for overlays,
recommends that to avoid reflection cracking no more there are some additional factors that must be consid­
than 5 percent o f the fractured slab have a modulus ered
greater than 1 m illio n psi Effective slab cracking The most significant o f these additional factors that
techniques are necessary in order to satisfy this crite­ are under the control o f the designer include the dete­
rion for crack/seat o f JP C P rioration of transverse reflection cracks caused by un­
Break/seat is used only with J R C P and includes the derlying deteriorated jo in t and cracks, P C C
requirement to rupture the reinforcement steel across disintegration caused from poor P C C durability and
each crack, or break its bond with the concrete If the P C C slab past fatigue damage Rutting o f an A C over­
reinforcement is not ruptured and its bond with the lay and aging of an A C overlay causing shrinkage
concrete is not broken, the differential movements at cracks and raveling/weathering are additional factors
w orking joints and cracks w ill not be reduced and that affect overlay life but are materials related piob-
reflection cracks w ill occur Recent field testing of lems
several break/seat projects showed a wide range in These additional factors have a much m oie sig n ifi­
cant effect on the performance o f A C and bonded P C C
backcalculated modulus values ranging from a few
hundred thousand psi to several m illio n psi (20, 34, overlays than unbonded jointed concrete overlays The
follow ing sections describe the background for the
38, 47), and within-project coefficients o f variation o f
adjustment factors for A C and bonded P C C overlays
40 percent or more (20, 38) The wide range in back-
A follow ing section describes their use for unbonded
calculated m oduli reported for break and seat projects
overlays
suggests a lack of consistency in the technique as per­
Values for the three main factors are described It is
formed with past construction equipment Even
emphasized that user agencies should carefully exam­
though cracks are observed, the JR C P frequently re­
ine the values for these condition factors and m odify
tains a substantial degree o f slab action because of
them as needed on the basis o f local conditions and
failure to either rupture the reinforcing steel or break
experience
its bond with the concrete This may also be responsi­
ble for the inconsistency o f this technique in reducing
reflection cracking M o re effective breaking equip­ L6.1.1 Condition Factor Fjc
ment may overcome this problem This design proce­
dure assumes that the steel w ill be ruptured or that its The A A S H T O rig id pavement design equation does
bond to the concrete w ill be broken through an aggres­ not consider the loss o f serviceability caused by dete­
sive break/seat process, and that this w ill be verified riorated transverse reflection cracks through the over­
in the field through deflection testing before the over­ lay In fact, the A A S H T O design for future structural
L-34 Design o f Pavement Structures

capacity has absolutely nothing to do with reflection (3) existing expansion joints, exceptionally wide
cracking The procedure does consider loss o f serv­ joints (greater than 1 inch) or full-depth, full-
iceability due to regular transverse joints that create lane-width A C patches
some roughness due to faulting and m inor spalling,
w hich is sim ilar to transverse reflection cracks that do Pavements with “ D ” cracking or reactive aggre­
not deteriorate (spall, depress) significantly A direct gate deterioration often have deterioration at the joints
way to consider the loss o f serviceability of the overlay and cracks from durability problems The F dur factor
caused by deteriorated transverse reflection cracks is used to adjust the overlay thickness for this prob­
must be added to the procedure lem Therefore, when this is the case, the FjC should be
Transverse joints and cracks (and punchouts in determined from Figure L 6 1 only using those non­
C R C P ) that are wide and/or deteriorated and showing repaired deteriorated joints and cracks that aie not
poor load transfer w ill typically result in rapid reflec­ caused by durability problems If all of the deterio­
tion o f cracks in A C or P C C bonded overlays The rated joints and cracks are spalling due to “ D ” crack­
deterioration o f those reflection cracks usually causes ing or reactive aggregate, then F jc = 1 0 This w ill
a serious loss o f serviceability avoid adjusting twice with FjC and F dur factors
This potential failure mechanism must be consid­ If these are repaired using a full-depth P C C repair
ered directly either through treatments (e g , fabrics, that contains dowel or tie bars for load transfer, then
saw and seal, rubblizing, break/seat, ciack/seat or these are no longer serious problems that cause rapid
through increasing overlay thickness through the deterioration o f the reflection cracks The cracks w ill
joints and cracks adjustment factor (F jC) Overlay still occur but their deterioration w ill be far less se­
thickness increases w ill have two effects The first is vere, and can be controlled through proper crack seal­
to somewhat delay the occurrence of the initial crack, ing
but the most important effect is to reduce the severity The extent of jo in t load transfer w ill also affect the
o f the reflected crack and retard its rate o f deteriora­ deterioiation of reflection cracks in the overlay This
tion w hich is very important in maintaining service­ is considered to some extent by the J factor in deter­
ability m ining D f
It may not be cost-effective to increase slab thick­ The F jc curve was developed by considering the
ness to reduce reflection crack deteiioration This effect that deteriorated reflection cracks has upon te-
G uide strongly recommends that all existing deterio­ ducing the serviceability of the overlaid pavement,
rated joints and cracks are lepaiied with full-depth and thus reducing its service life A major poition of
doweled P C C lepairs, so that FJC = 1 00 However, i f the loss o f serviceability is due to deteriorated reflec­
this is not possible, then the FjC can be adjusted to tion cracks (75 percent was assumed) Therefore, an
account for this extia loss in PSI adjustment factor, Fjc, must be applied so that a
It is strongly recommended that all “ deteriorated” thicker oveilay w ill result to adjust for this loss in
joints and cracks (punchouts in C R C P should be full- serviceability from reflection cracks The following
depth repaired with tied reinforced repairs) be fu ll- steps were taken in the development of the F JC factoi
depth repaired with doweled or tied P C C repairs to The serviceability of an AC-overlaid J C P pavement
avoid serious deterioration o f reflection cracks I f they was related to the number o f deteriorated reflection
are, then Fjc = 1 0 Due to funding and other con­ cracks/m ile Deteriorated here means any crack that
straints, this may not be possible and the FJC is then had spalled, had adjacent broken pieces or had settled
determined from Figure L 6 1 which is based upon the significantly to cause roughness A panel of raters
number o f unrepaired transverse joints anu cracks (or riding in a standard-sized automobile made the ratings
punchouts or other sim ilar failed areas) that are con­ given in Figure L 6 2 Present serviceability lating
sidered to be “ deteriorated” and would cause the re­ loss was calculated as 4 5 (typical new pavement) m i­
flection crack to spall or settle A n y of the follow ing nus the mean panel PSI rating The line labelled
conditions should be counted as deteriorated trans­ “ 100” is the best-fit curve through the data It was
verse joints/cracks assumed that 75 percent o f the total PSI loss was
( 1) medium- or high-severity spalled transverse caused by the deteriorated transverse reflection
joints cracks, with the rest caused by other less severe
(2 ) medium- or high-severity spalled transverse cracks, rutting and foundation movements The curve
cracks (including any jo in t where the spalls are labeled “ 75” represents 75 percent o f the best-fit
patched with A C mixture) curve loss in PSI
Appendix L L - J5

O
O
CN
<D
1— 1
•H
O 6
00

to
o r *
o 0
cd
u
u
o
7 3
a
n j
u
w
o to cd
CN •P
fa
a s
•H E
tn
0 =5
O b
I
O u
a) Es T
(0
p

O a ) fa
00 P
3
to
.2 f
G fa
<d
o u
o

T J
0 )
o •P
<d
M
0
•H
o P
CN
0 )
■P
a)
Q
O
o io o lO o «o o lO o lO o IO o
o o OS oo 0O C-* SO *o lO «o ■N| h ;
pH o d o o d d o o o d d d
L -36 Design o f Pavement Structures

0
H
•H
£

PSR Loss Versus Deteriorated Transverse Joints and Cracks per Mile
X
0
<d
u
u

Tl
a
<d

m
P
a
•H
O
b

0
w
M
0
>
0

(d
M
EH
TJ Figure L6.2.
0
•P
(d
PSR Loss

u
o

U
0
P
0
Q
cO cO C O C N C N I < N ( N < N ^ ^ ^ - h ^ O O O O O
Appendix L L-37

Figure L 6 3 was developed next using the resulting in a very thick overlay To avoid this situa­
A A S H T O rig id pavement design equation and several tion, the follow ing m odification was developed
pavement sections submitted by the states for overlay A point o f particular concern is the strong correla­
design Each point represents a single section of tion between the F jc and F dur, since any pavement with
jointed concrete pavement The amount o f loss of PSI significant durability problems would very like ly have
was varied from 0 to nearly 100 percent o f the total a lot o f deterioiated joints and cracks Therefore,
loss of PSI by changing the terminal PSI in the rigid when durability problems exist, the counting o f any
pavement equation and solving for the required over­ deteriorated jo in t or crack to determine Fjc is prohib­
lay thickness F or example, the follow ing results were ited where the deterioration is caused by “ D ” crack­
obtained for one o f the sections ing or reactive aggregate problems For example, i f all
o f the joints were spalled from “ D ” cracking, the
FjC = 1 00 and the F dur is determined according to the
Assumed PSI Loss standard guidelines
Total PSI Loss from Required The other correlations between Fjc, F dur, and F fat
PSI from Refl. Other AC OL Computed are not believed to be particularly significant, and
Loss Cracking Causes (in) F. **
Jc there are numerous things that can make the correla­
tion very poor, especially when any pre-overlay repair
2 0* 0 0 2 0 3 2 1 00
is done, or when most o f the deterioration is in the
2 0 0 5 1 5 4 1 0 95
joints and not cracks Therefore, no additional consid­
2 0 1 0 1 0 5 2 0 88
erations were given to other correlations between the
2 0 1 5 0 5 7 4 0 74
three factors
2 0 1 8 0 2 10 2 0 53

^Initial PSI = 4 5, terminal PSI = 2 5 , 4 5 — 2 5 = 2 0

**The computed Fjc is that required to give the correct
L6.1.2 Condition Factor Fdur
overlay thickness so that the overlaid pavement will be able
to carry the design ESALs without reducing the PSI below
The disintegration o f the existing P C C slab beneath
2 5
an overlay has resulted in increased deterioration of
A C and bonded P C C overlays, reducing their service­
The final step was to use Figures L 6 2 and L 6 3 to ability and service life The P C C slab disintegrates to
develop the Figure L 6 1 curve relating the number of the point that it reverts back to granular m ateiial in
deteriorated joints/cracks to F JC This was done point localized areas These areas o f the underlying P C C
by point by taking 20, 40, 60, etc cracks/m i from slab experience something like shear failure under
Figure L 6 2 and determining the corresponding PSI heavy loads resulting in a seriously localized failed
loss (using the 75-percent curve) and taking this value area in the wheel paths that cause rapid loss o f serv­
to Figure L 6 3 to determine the F jc The correspond­ iceability This can be adjusted to some extent by
ing F jc and number o f deteriorated transverse cracks increasing overlay thickness to reduce vertical stresses
point was plotted on Figure L 6 1 A smooth curve was under wheel loads so that the design life can be
fin a lly plotted for Figure L 6 1 achieved
For existing composite pavements (A C /P C C ) that The types o f P C C durability that are most sig n ifi­
are being considered for a new A C overlay, it can be cant are “ D ” cracking and reactive aggregates dam­
age The occurrence o f either o f these is lik e ly to have
assumed that any reflection crack that is spalled and
a significant effect on pavement performance
deteriorated is probably overlying a join t or crack in
For example, in Illin ois, survival curves based on
sim ilar condition in the base slab It is recommended
hundreds of A C overlays o f JR C P and C R C P show that
that these areas be full-depth repaired I f they are not,
pavements without “ D ” cracking w ill last substan­
then they should also be counted as a deteriorated
tially longer and carry substantially many more
joint/crack in determining the appropriate Fjc
E S A L s to failure than pavements with “ D ” cracking
It is noted at this point that the three adjustment
This result is used by backing through the overlay
factors (Fjc, F dur, and F fat are somewhat interrelated
design procedure to develop reasonable values for
and certain situations could arise that would produce
an overlay design that is too conservative For exam­ Fdur

ple, a jointed pavement w ith a ll o f the joints spalled A typical JR C P pavement with an A C overlay
due to “ D ” cracking would have a low Fjc and F dur in Illin o is is designed for 15 m illio n rigid
 Design o f Pavement Structures

03

03
03

0
01

00

Loss
F jc Factor Versus PSR
* m
^ LO
O
03 ►
—3

0$

Figure L6.3.
CO
o

o
o

03
o

p
to o lO o to o to o to o to o
1 .0 0

o o CO CO r>. c». >o o LO to •^r

d d d d d d d o d o d o
Appendix L L-39

E S A L s (over a 15-year period) Setting removing a section o f pavement across a traffic lane
F jC = 1 0 , F dur = 1 0 and Ffat = 0 95 (typi­ and observing the A C / P C C slab face are some ways to
cal), an A C overlay thickness o f 3 4 inches determine the extent o f concrete durability problems
is obtained from the design procedure at an in the base slab
R = 95 percent This assumes sound con­
crete for the slab
I f the pavement has significant “ D ” cracking, L6.1.3 Condition Factor Ffat
this 3 4-inch overlay would only carry
about 15/2 = 7 5 m illio n E S A L s to term i­
M ost existing concrete slabs have carried traffic for
nal serviceability This would correspond to many years and have developed some fatigue damage
a F dur = 0 88 for the same A C overlay
which affects future cracking and, therefore, should
thickness I f the pavement is then designed be considered in the overlay design Consideration of
with an F dur = 0 88 and E S A L s = 15 m il­ this past fatigue damage w ill make the overlay a little
lion , a required A C overlay o f 5 3 inches is
thicker to retard future fatigue caused cracks develop­
obtained T h is is a reasonable value based ing in the P C C slab that would eventually reflect
upon survival curve data for “ D ” cracked through the overlay, deteriorate and cause additional
pavements in Illin o is loss o f serviceability Therefore, the F fat factor is in ­
Based upon this inform ation, some guidelines for cluded to adjust for the existing fatigue damage in the
F dur were developed for less severe and more severe slab It should be noted that the existing slab can have
concrete durability conditions a very high flexural strength, but it w ill still have
fatigue damage that w ill reduce its future fatigue life
F dur — 1 0, i f the P C C slab exhibits no signs This past fatigue damage is usually considered
o f “ D ” cracking or reactive through the calculation o f M in e r’s fatigue damage,
aggregate damage and the future allowable damage is 1 0 minus the past
0 9 6 -0 99, i f the P C C slab exhibits damage For example, i f past damage was computed to
signs o f “ D ” cracking or reactive be 0 4 (or 40-percent fatigue consumed), future dam­
aggregate damage (cracks) at joints age available until 50 percent o f the slabs were
and cracks, but only a m inor cracked would be 1 0 — 0 4 = 0 6 (or 60 percent),
amount o f spalling has occurred instead o f 1 0 (or 100 percent) This results in a some­
0 88-0 95, i f the P C C slab exhibits what thicker overlay However, the impact o f this fac­
“ D ” cracking or reactive tor is not dramatic (42) For example, calculations
aggregate cracking and spalling at were performed that showed i f the past M in e r’s dam­
joints and cracks to the extent that age varied from 0 1 to 0 75, the A C overlay thickness
significant amount o f spalling has varied only about 2 inches A variation of the F fat
occurred factor from 1 0 to 0 9 also results in a change in A C
0 80-0 88 , i f the P C C slab exhibits overlay requirements o f about 2 inches Based upon
“ D ” cracking or reactive this lim ited inform ation, the follow ing guidelines
aggregate cracking and spalling at were developed
joints and cracks to an extensive
Ffat = 0 97-1 00 , few transverse
degree
cracks/punchouts exist (< 5-percent
F or bonded P C C overlays, the last two categories slabs are cracked), very little
are combined F dur = 0 80 to 0 95 for pavements with fatigue damage has occurred
“ D ” cracking and spalling Bonded P C C overlays are 0 9 4 -0 96, a significant amount of
norm ally not recommended under these conditions transverse cracks/punchouts exists
For composite pavements (A C /P C C ), the durability (5-15 percent slabs cracked), a
o f the underlying slab is d ifficu lt to determine from significant amount o f fatigue
visual observations, unless the deterioration is severe damage has occurred
and shear failures have actually occurred beneath the 0 9 0 -0 93, a large amount of
A C overlay This results in localized failure areas that transverse cracks/punchouts exists
can be quite severe It is very d ifficu lt to locate these (> 15-percent slabs), a large
areas, let alone to repair them Selected coring, m ill­ amount o f fatigue damage has
ing representative areas o f the existing A C overlay, or occurred
L -40 Design o f Pavement Structures

For A C / P C C pavements, the degree o f fatigue dam­ ther durability problems or fatigue damage in the base
age in the P C C slab is very d ifficu lt to discern from slab
the number o f reflection cracks in the A C surface, When designing an unbonded overlay o f an existing
since it may be d ifficu lt to distinguish reflection A C /P C C pavement, the existing A C pavement is not
cracks caused by w orking cracks in the P C C from considered to make any contribution to D eff, that is,
reflection cracks caused by joints or repairs Field the D used is the thickness o f the P C C slab only
performance has not shown a significant number of
“ fatigue” type failures on composite pavements,
w hich may be due to the beneficial effect that an over­ L6.1.5 Condition Factor Fac
lay has on reducing both load and thermal curling
stresses Because there is no practical way to obtain a M aterial problems in the existing A C surface layer
value for F fat, it has been eliminated for second A C o f an A C / P C C pavement is lik e ly to reflect those prob­
overlay design for composite pavements lems through a new A C overlay and cause increased
loss of serviceability and service life This can be
adjusted to some extent by increasing the new overlay
thickness to reduce vertical stresses and strains under
L6.1.4 Condition Factors for Unbonded wheel loads so that the design life can be achieved
Concrete Overlays This factor adjusts the existing A C layer’s contribution
to D eff based on the quality of the A C material The
Unbonded concrete overlays o f existing concrete value selected should depend only on distresses re­
pavements or of composite (A C /P C C ) pavements re­ lated to the A C material (i e , rutting, stripping, shov­
quire different considerations F ield surveys of un­ ing, weathering and ravelling, but not reflection
bonded jointed concrete overlays, separated by the cracking) which are not eliminated by surface m illin g
conventional one-half to one inch of bituminous mate­ Consideration should be given to complete removal of
ria l layer, have not shown any evidence o f reflection a poor-quality A C layer Values o f Fac were developed
cracking or other distress from any of the follow ing based on engineering judgement for reasonable loss o f
conditions (55) PSI

• deteriorated joints or cracks in underlying 1 00: N o A C material distress

slabs, 0 9 6 -0 99 M in o r A C material distress
8 additional fatigue cracking of the base slab, or (weathering, ravelling) not
8 durability problems in the base slab corrected by surface m illin g
0 88-0 95 Significant A C material distress
O n the other hand, unbonded C R C P overlays have (rutting, stripping, shoving)
been shown to be more dependent on the supporting 0 80-0 88 Severe A C material distress
slab conditions, particularly unrepaired distress in the (rutting, stripping, shoving)
base slab (49, 50, 51 ) Although the thickness design
procedure provided is the same for both jointed and
C R C overlays, it is emphasized that unbonded over­ L6.1.6 AC-to-PCC Conversion Factor A
lays are not intended to bridge areas of poor support,
and in particular C R C overlays may require more pre­ A conversion factor, A is used in the A C overlay
overlay repair in some situations design procedures for P C C and A C / P C C pavements to
O n ly one condition factor is used for thickness de­ convert P C C thickness deficiency to required A C
sign of unbonded overlays, F )C[I, which is illustrated in overlay thickness, as shown below:
Figure L 6 4 Th is condition factor makes a smaller
correction to the existing slab thickness D than the F JC
D„i — A (D f — D eff) (6 1)
factor (Figure L 6 1) which is used for design of
bonded P C C overlays and A C overlays This smaller
correction reflects the fact that unbonded overlays are A value for A o f about 2 5 is com monly considered
less lik e ly to experience reflection cracking due to reasonable for thin overlays For example, a 2-inch
deteriorated joints or cracks in the existing slab The bonded P C C overlay is roughly equivalent, in terms of
F dur and F fat factors are not used at all in the unbonded stress in the base slab, to a 5-inch A C overlay H ow ­
overlay design procedure, since it has not been shown ever, it is a concern that for greater P C C thickness
that unbonded overlay performance is sensitive to ei­ deficiencies, using a value o f 2 5 for A produces A C
Appendix L
L-41

O
o

p H

•H
g
F■4
a
m
o

FJCU Adjustment Factor for Unbonded JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP Overlays
2 0
<d
n
u
o

a
cd
o W
oj jJ
^ c
•iH
0
O
o
~ <D
0)
U

0)

cd

TJ
0
o -P
Figure L6.4.

* fd
u
o
•H

-P
0)
Q
m o m o m o m o m o m o
1 .0 0

a- o CO CO tx <> •o in lO ■sf •Sf

o o d d d o o d o o o o
L-42 Design o f Pavement Structures

overlay thicknesses which are not realistic For exam­ tic layer program B IS A R was used to compute stresses
ple, a 6 -inch bonded P C C overlay would correspond in P C C slabs with a range o f P C C modulus (1-6 m il­
to a 15-inch A C overlay i f A = 2 5 This concern lion psi), A C modulus (250-750 ksi), bonded P C C
warrants an investigation and reconsideration o f the A overlay deficiency (1-8 inches) and corresponding A C
factor for design o f A C overlays o f P C C pavements overlay thicknesses (1-16 inches) The A factor re­
The Corps of Engineers has used a value of A = quired (for an A C overlay thickness which would pro­
2 5 for loadway and airfield A C overlay design for duce the same stress in the base slab as a given
many years The historical development of the Corps thickness of bonded P C C overlay) was found to de­
o f Engineers’ overlay design procedures was de­ crease as the P C C overlay thickness increased The
scribed by Chou in 1984 (40) The value of 2 5 for A value of the A factor depends on the elastic modulus of
was determined experim entally in the early 1950’s the A C , w hich o f course varies daily and seasonally
based on accelerated traffic tests on six test tracks with temperature For an A C modulus corresponding
The concrete slab thicknesses ranged from 6 to 12 to the standard temperature o f 68 °F (450 ksi) used in
inches and the A C overlay thicknesses ranged from 3 Part II o f the Guide, the follow ing equation was ob­
to 42 inches The six test tracks also encompassed a tained
range of subgrade strengths O nly 26 of the 53 test
sections had A C overlays w hich were full-depth,
dense-graded A C The remainder o f the “ flexible” A = 2 2233 + 0 0099(Df - D eff)2
overlays were plant-m ix black base with an A C sur­
- 0 1 5 3 4 (D f - D rff) (6 2)
face," water-bound macadam with an A C surface, sta­
bilize d crushed rock with an A C surface, and
sa.nd-asphalt base with an A C surface where
The analysis o f the results from these field tests
was reported by M e llin g e r and Sale in 1956 (41) Ref­ A = Factor to convert P C C thickness
erence 41 contains a plot of the test results for the A C deficiency to A C overlay thickness
overlays, in w hich P C C deficiency (full slab design Df = Slab thickness to carry future traffic,
thickness for test loading minus existing thickness) is inches
plotted against A C overlay thickness A straight line D eff = Effective thickness o f existing slab,
w ith a 1:2 5 slope was diawn through the plotted inches
points This line is not a best-fit line, but rathei a R2 = 99 percent
recommended design line, as described by M ellinger standard
and Sale 0 018
error
“A ‘ design’ line, which is on the conservative
boundary o f the points plotted, has been placed In addition to determining A C overlay thickness
on Figure 7 In fact, the design line, which requirements, an A factor must also be used to convert
shows a 2 5 to 1 ratio between flexible overlay an existing A C overlay to an equivalent thickness of
thickness and concrete deficiency, encom­ P C C for determination o f the D eff o f an A C / P C C pave­
passes all items that were carried to failure, ment A gain, the true value changes with the elastic
and only those items which were not failed modulus of the in-service A C overlay, but for design
under the imposed traffic fall below this rec­ purposes, a single value is required Based on the
ommended slope For these unfailed items, the lesults o f the field and analytical studies described
indication is that less overlay thickness would here, a value o f 2 0 was selected, as shown in the
have carried the same number o f coverages ” follow ing equation
(41)
A summary of the results from Reference 41 is
Deff — (D pcc * F jc * F dur) + * F at (6 3)
given in Table L 6 1 It is evident that most of the A 2 0
factors are closer to 2 0 than 2 5 O f the thicker over­
lays with higher A factors, nearly all except those at
the Sharonville N o 1 test track did not fail during the where
course of the field tests
To investigate further what A factor should be used D pcc = thickness o f existing P C C slab, inches
in design o f A C overlays o f P C C pavements, the elas­ D ac = thickness of existing A C surface, inches
Appendix L L

Table L 6 .1 . R esu lts o f C o rp s o f En g in eers S tud y o f P C C - v s - A C O v e rla y A F a cto r (41)

PCC A C O ve rla y
D eficiency Th ickn ess A
Test Site O v e rla y Type (inches) (inches) F actor

Sharonville N o 1 A ll A C binder and surface 22 5 6 2 5

16 65 4 1
11 80 7 3
13 8 1 62
3 6 9 5** 2 6 **
2 3 9 5 4 1
2 1 9 6 4 6

Sharonville N o 1 B la ck base and 4-inch A C surface 4 9 9 8 20

6 8 13 2 19
7 2 15 8 2 2
3 5 82 2 3
5 6 12 2 2 2
5 3 10 3 19

Sharonville N o 1 Waterbound macadam and 4-inch 62 12 1 20

A C surface 7 9 18 0 2 3
9 6 24 5** 2 6 **

Sharonville N o 2 A ll A C binder and surface 5 0 9 5 19

7 2 14 5 2 0
86 20 5 2 4
3 4 60 18
4 5 9 5 2 1
5 8 11 5 2 0
2 2 4 25 19
3 5 7 0 2 0
4 6 9 5 2 1
2 2 4 0 18
15 3 0 2 0

Sharonville N o 2 Stabilized crushed rock and 4-inch 9 3 42 0** 4 5**

A C surface 9 3 35 0** 3 8 **
7 3 23 0** 3 2 **
7 3 17 0** 2 3 **
5 4 12 5 2 3
4 0 9 0 22

M axw ell A ll A C binder and surface 17 6 0 ** 3 5**

2 1 3 0** 14
18 4 0** 2 2

Lockbourne N o 3 B la ck base and 3-inch A C surface 2 7 6 0 ** 2 2 **

2 7 9 o** 3 3**

Lockbourne N o 3 Sand-asphalt base and 3-inch 2 7 9 o** 3 3**

A C surface
**AC overlay carried more than the 3,000 coverages applied in the test without failure
L -44 Design o f Pavement Structures

L6.2 Deff BASED ON REMAINING LIFE and future required structural capacity determined
from the A A S H T O flexible and rig id pavement design
The remaining life approach to determination of equations These concepts were retained to maintain
D eff is the same for rig id pavements as for flexible com patibility between Parts II and III o f the Guide
pavements, except that structural capacity is charac­ Development o f a more sophisticated mechanistic
terized by slab thickness terms (D and D eff) rather approach to overlay design was not w ithin the scope of
than structural number terms (SN and S N eff) The this project Nondestructive deflection testing for
reader is referred to Section 5 2 for a thorough discus­ characterization of the existing pavement is recom­
sion o f this topic For both rig id and flexible pave­ mended, to the extent appropriate w ithin the frame­
ments, it is emphasized that the remaining life work of these em pirical design procedures
approach to determining effective structural capacity The 1986 A A S H T O overlay design procedures
does not reflect any benefit for pre-overlay repair weie extensively revised to make them easier to use,
The remaining life approach is applicable only to more adaptable to calibration by local agencies, and
bare A C and P C C pavements, for which the allowable more comprehensive Key revisions to the overlay de­
traffic to failure (N, 5) may be determined from the sign procedures include the follow ing
new pavement design equations or nomographs given
in Part II of the G uide It is not applicable to pave­ (1) Guidelines for overlay type feasibility
ments w hich are constructed as new composites (AC/ (2) Guidelines for several important consider­
P C C ), since no design equation is given in Part II for ations
this type of pavement The remaining life approach is Pre-overlay repair
also not applicable to A C or P C C pavements which Subdrainage
have already been overlaid one or more times For Shoulders
these reasons, no remaining life approach to D eff de­ A C rutting
termination is given in the design procedure for A C P C C durability
overlays of A C /J C P and A C / C R C P pavements Pavement widening
Reflection crack control
A C surface m illin g
L6.3 Deff BASED ON NONDESTRUCTIVE A C surface recycling
TESTING Overlay design re liability level
P C C overlay bonding/separation layers
Long-term deflection testing of rig id pavements has
P C C overlay joints and reinforcement
shown that no change occurs in deflections taken at
(3) Description of complete step-by-step overlay
m idslab until after slab clackin g occurs at that loca­
design procedure for each overlay type
tion There may be a relationship between pavement
A C overlay o f A C P
deflections and D eff for rig id pavements, however, it is
A C overlay o f fractured slab P C C
complicated by the fact that the measurements would
pavements
have to be taken across joints and cracks This
A C overlay of JPCP, JRCP, and C R C P
presents difficulties in field testing (which cracks of
A C overlay o f A C /JP C P, A C /JR C P , and
what severities to test, where to place the load plate
A C /C R C P
and sensors) and also in the analysis (which crack data
Bonded P C C overlay o f JPCP, JRCP, and
to use, how to include results from ciacks and joints as
CRCP
w ell as m idslab locations) Further research is needed
Unbonded JP C P /JR C P /C R C P overlay of
before this approach can be developed For this rea­
son, no N D T approach to determination o f D eff is JPCP, JRCP, C R C P, or A C / P C C
given in the overlay design procedures for rigid pave­ JPCP, JRCP, and C R C P overlay o f A C P
ments (4) Guidelines for nondestructive and visual/cor-
ing and testing for overlay design
(5) Guidelines for selecting inputs for determina­
L7.0 CONCLUSIONS tion o f required future structural capacity
(S N f , D f)
The overlay design procedures presented in the re­ (6 ) Guidelines for characterization o f effective
visions to Chapter 5 u tilize the concepts of structural structural capacity o f existing pavement
deficiency, structural number for flexible pavements, (SN eff, D eff) using three approaches
Appendix L L-45

V isu al condition survey and materials N o 208, U n iversity o f Illin o is at Urbana-

testing Champaign, 1976
N D T testing (where appropriate) 8 Am erican Association o f State Highway and
Rem aining life (where appropriate) Transportation O fficials, Guide fo r Design o f
Adjustments to effective structural Pavement Structures, Volum e 2, Appendices,
capacity may be made based upon Washington, D C , 1986
pre-overlay repair 9 Thompson, M R and Robnett, Q L , “ R esil­
(7) Improved adaptability o f the overlay thickness ient Properties o f Subgrade Soils,” Final Re­
design procedures to local conditions to pro­ port— Data Summary, Transportation
duce more reasonable answers Engineering Series N o 14, Illin o is Coopera­
M any example overlay designs are provided tive Highway Research and Transportation
in Reference 37 that illustrate the application Program Series N o 160, U niversity o f Illin ois
o f the procedures under different conditions at Urbana-Cham paign, 1976
The results achieved with the procedures ap­ 10 Figueroa, J L , “ Resilient-Based Flexible
pear to generally provide adequate overlay Pavement Design Procedure for Secondary
thickness designs There exists several inputs Roads,” Ph D thesis, U n iversity o f Illin ois at
that can be adjusted to tailor the procedures to Urbana-Cham paign, 1979
any given highway agency, such as design re li­ 11 Raad, L and Figueroa, J L , “ Load Response
ability level, selection o f resilient modulus of o f Transportation Support Systems,” Transpor­
subgrade, layer coefficients, and jo in t load tation Engineering Journal, Am erican Society
transfer J factor o f C iv il Engineers, Volum e 106, N o T E 1,
1980
12 Traylor, M L , “ Characterization o f Flexible
REFERENCES Pavements by Nondestructive Testing,” Ph D
thesis, U n iversity o f Illin o is at Urbana-Cham ­
1 Am erican Association o f State Highway and paign, 1979
Transportation O fficia ls, Guide fo r Design o f 13 Hoffm an, M S and Thompson, M R ,
Pavement Structures, Washington, D C , “ M echanistic Interpretation o f Nondestructive
1986 Pavement Testing Deflections,” Transportation
2 Am erican Association o f State Highway and Engineering Series N o 32, Illin o is Coopera­
Transportation O fficia ls, Interim Guide fo r tive Highway and Transportation Research Se­
Design o f Flexible Pavement Structures, Com ­ ries N o 190, U niversity of Illin ois at
mittee on Design, 1961 Urbana-Cham paign, 1981
3 Am erican Association o f State Highway and 14 E R E S Consultants, Inc , “ Nondestructive
Transportation O fficia ls, Interim Guide fo r Structural Evaluation o f A irfie ld Pavements,”
Design o f Rigid Pavement Structures, Com m it­ prepared for U S A rm y Corps o f Engineers
tee on Design, 1962 Waterways Experim ent Station, Vicksbuig,
4 Wang, M C and K ila re sk i, W P , “ F ield Per­ M S , 1982
formance o f Aggregate-Lim e-Pozzolan Base 15 Foxworthy, P T , “ Concepts for the Develop­
M aterial,” Transportation Research Record ment o f a Nondestructive Testing and Evalua­
N o 725, 1979 tion System for R ig id A irfie ld Pavements,”
5 Am erican Association o f State Highway and Ph D thesis, U n iversity of Illin ois at Urbana-
Transportation O fficia ls, Interim Guide fo r Champaign, 1985
Design o f Pavement Structures, 1972 16 Ioannides, A M , “ Dim ensional A n alysis in
6 Am erican Association o f State Highway and N D T R ig id Pavement Evaluation,” Transpor­
Transportation O fficia ls, Interim Guide fo r tation Engineering Journal, Am erican Society
Design o f Pavement Structures, Chapter III re­ of C iv il Engineers, Volume 116, N o T E 1 ,
vised, 1981 1990
1 E llio tt, R P and Thompson, M R , “ M echa­ 17 Ioannides, A M , Barenberg, E J , and Lary,
nistic Design Concepts for Conventional F le x i­ J A , “ Interpretation o f Falling Weight Deflec-
ble Pavements,” Transportation Engineering tometer Results Using Principles o f D i­
Series N o 42, Illin o is Cooperative Highway mensional A nalysis,” Proceedings, Fourth In­
Research and Transportation Program Series ternational Conference on Concrete Pavement
L -46 Design o f Pavement Structures

Design and Rehabilitation, Purdue University, Displacem ent Under a C ircu la r Loaded Area,”
1989 by L A Palm er and E S Barber, Proceedings,
18 Westergaard, H M , “ Stresses in Concrete Highway Research Board, Volum e 20, 1940
Runways o f A irports,” Ptoceedings, Highway 31 U llid tz, P , Pavement Analysis, Elsevier S ci­
Research Board, Volum e 19, 1939 ence Publishers B V , 1987
19 Highway Research Board, “ The A A S H O Road 32 U llid tz , P “ Overlay and Stage by Stage D e­
Test, Report 5, Pavement Research,” Special sign,” Proceedings, Fourth International C on ­
Report 6 IE , 1962 ference on Structural Design o f Asphalt
20 H a ll, K T , “ Performance, Evaluation, and Pavements, A n n Arbor, M ich ig an , 1977
Rehabilitation o f Asphalt Overlaid Concrete 33 Vespa, J W , H a ll, K T , Darter, M I , and
Pavements,” Ph D thesis, U niversity of I lli­ H a ll, J P , “ Performance o f Resurfacing of
nois at Urbana-Cham paign, 1991 J R C P and C R C P on the Illin o is Interstate
21 Southgate, H F , “A n Evaluation o f Tempera­ Highway System,” Transportation Engineering
ture D istribution W ithin Asphalt Pavements Series N o 61, Illin ois Cooperative Highway
and its Relationship to Pavement Deflection,” and Transportation Research Program Series
Kentucky Department o f Highways, Research N o 229, 1990
Report K Y H P R -6 4 -2 0 , 1968 34 Thompson, M R , “ Breaking/Cracking and
22 Shell International Petroleum Company, Seating Concrete Pavements,” N C H R P Syn­
“ Pavement Design M anual,” London, E n ­ thesis N o 144, 1989
gland, 1978 35 Voigt, G F , Carpenter, S H , and Darter,
23 Asphalt Institute, “ Research and Development M I , “ Rehabilitation of Concrete Pavements,
o f the Asphalt Institute’s Thickness Design Volum e 2 — Overlay Rehabilitation Tech­
M anual (M S-1) Ninth Edition,” Research Re­ niques,” Federal Highway Adm inistration Re­
port 82-2, 1982 port N o FH W A-R D -88-072, 1989
24 Thompson, M R and Cation, K A , “A P ro­ 36 K ilare ski, W P and Bionda, R A , “ Perfoim -
posed Full-D epth Asphalt Concrete Thickness ance/Rehabilitation of R ig id Pavements, Phase
Design Procedure,” Transportation Engineer­ II, Volum e 2— C rack and Seat and A C Oveilay
ing Series N o 45, Illin o is Cooperative H ig h ­ of R ig id Pavements,” Federal Highway Adm in­
way and Transportation Program Series N o istration Report N o FH W A-R D -89-143, 1989
213, U n iversity o f Illin o is at Urbana-Cham ­ 37 Darter, M I , E llio tt, R P , and H a ll, K T ,
paign, 1986 “ Revision of A A S H T O Pavement Overlay De­
25 Carpenter, S H and VanDam, T , “ Labora­ sign Procedures, Appendix Overlay Design
tory Performance Com paiisons o f Polymer- Examples,” N C H R P Project 20-7/Task 39, F i­
M o d ifie d and U nm odified Asphalt Concrete nal Report, A p ril 1992
M ixtures,” Transportation Research Record 38 Pavement Consultancy Services/Law E n g i­
N o 1115, 1987 neering, “ Guidelines and Methodologies for
26 E llio tt, R P , “A n Exam ination o f the the Rehabilitation o f R ig id Highway Pavements
A A S H T O Rem aining L ife Factor,” Transporta­ Using Asphalt Concrete Overlays,” for N a­
tion Research Record N o 1215, 1989 tional Asphalt Paving Association, June 1991
27 Boussinesq, J , “A pplication des Potentials a 39 Carpenter, S H , “ Layer Coefficients for F le x ­
1’ Etude de L ’ E q u ilibre et du Mouvement des ible Pavements,” E R E S Consultants, Inc , for
Solides Elastiques,” Gauthier-Villars, Paris, W isconsin DOT, August 1990
France, 1885 40 Chou, Y T , “Asphalt Overlay Design for A ir ­
28 Yoder, E J , Principles o f Pavement Design, field Pavements,” Proceedings, Association of
John W iley and Sons, 1957 Asphalt Paving Technologists, Volum e 53,
29 Odemark, N , “ Investigations as to the Elastic A p ril 1984, pp 266-284
Properties o f Soils and Design of Pavements 41 M ellinger, F M and Sale, J P , “ The Design of
According to the Theory o f Elasticity,” M ed- N o n -R ig id Overlays for Concrete A irfie ld
delande 77, Statens Vaginstitut, Stockholm, Pavements,” Air Transport Journal, Am erican
Sweden, 1949 English translation provided by Society o f C iv il Engineers, Volum e 82, Num ­
A M Ioannides, 1990 ber A T 2, M ay 1956
30 Barber, E S , author’s closure, comments on 42 Seiler, W J , “A Knowledge-Base for Rehabili­
C A . Hogentogler, J r ’s discussion o f “ Soil tation o f A irfie ld Concrete Pavements,” Ph D
Appendix L L-47

thesis, U niversity o f Illin o is at Urbana-Cham ­ 47 Schutzbach, A M , “ C ra ck and Seat Method

paign, 1991 o f Pavement Rehabilitation,” Transportation
43 K allas, B F and Shook, J F , “ Factors Influ­ Research Record No 1215, 1989
encing D ynam ic M odulus o f Asphalt C on ­ 48 A h lrjch , R C , “ Performance and Structural
crete,” Proceedings, Association o f Asphalt EValuation of Cracked and Seated Concrete,”
Paving Technologists, Volum e 38, 1949 Transportation Research Record N o 1215,
44 M ille r, J S , Uzan, J , and W itczak, M W , 1989
“ M od ificatio n o f the Asphalt Institute B i­ 49 Tyner, H L , Gulden, W , and Brown, D ,
tuminous M ix M odulus Predictive Equation,” “ Resurfacing o f Plain Jointed Concrete Pave­
Transportation Research Record N o 911, ments,” Transpot tation Research Record No
1983 814, 1981
45 Barenberg, E J and Petros, K A , “ Evalua­ 50 Crawley, A B and Sheffield, J P , “ Continu­
tion o f Concrete Pavements Using N D T ously Reinforced Concrete Overlay o f Existing
Results,” Project IH R-512, U niversity of Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement,”
Illin o is and Illin o is Department o f Trans­ Transportation Research Record No 924, 1983
portation, Report N o U I L U - E N G - 9 1-2006, 51 Turgeon, R and Ishman, K D , “ Evaluation
1991 of Continuously Reinforced Concrete Overlay
46 Pavement Consultancy Services/Law E n g i­ and Repairs on Interstate Route 90, E rie
neering, “ F W D A n alysis o f PA 1-81 Rubbliza- County, Pennsylvania,” Pennsylvania Depart­
tion Project,” for Pennsylvania Department of ment o f Transportation, Research Report No
Transportation, February 1992 79-01, 1985
 APPENDIX M
AN EXAMINATION OF THE AASHTO
REMAINING LIFE FACTOR
Robert P. Elliott

The 1986 AASHTO Pavement Design Guide intro­ F rl = remaining life factor, a function of
duced a remaining life factor that is applied in the pavement condition prior to overlay and
design o f pavement overlays An examination o f the the condition predicted at the end o f the
remaining life concept was made to determine its design traffic
practicality. The examination revealed inconsistencies S N eff = the effective structural number o f the
in overlay designs determined using the AASHTO re­ existing pavement at the time o f overlay
maining life factor Further investigation revealed that
the remaining life factor should have a value o f l Ofor The remaining life factor (F ri) is determined using
all overlay situations As a result, it is recommended the graph shown as Figure M l In using the graph,
that the AASHTO overlay design approach be revised R Lx is the remaining life factor of the existing pave­
to exclude remaining life considerations ment at the time o f overlay, and R Ly is the anticipated
future remaining life of the overlaid pavement when it
w ill be overlaid Concern has been expressed regard­
The 1986 A A S H T O Pavement Design Guide (1)
ing the F rl concept O f particulai concern is the fact
introduced a rem aining life concept that is applied in
that at low values o f R Lx and R Ly, the general slope of
the design o f overlays The concept is based on the
the F rl curve reverses This investigation was initiated
rationale that the structural capacity o f a pavement
to study the concept and to establish a rationale for
decreases with load applications For a pavement that
this slope leversal
has been overlaid, the structural capacity of the o rig i­
The investigation demonstrated inconsistencies in
nal pavement is a function o f the loads applied before
overlay designs using the A A S H T O remaining life
overlay as w ell as those applied after overlay A s pre­
concept and suggests that for consistent designs F rl
sented by A A S H T O , the remaining life concept re­
should be 1 0 for all values o f remaining life
quires that overlay thicknesses be selected considering
both the “ rem aining” life o f the pavement at the time
o f overlay and the expected “ rem aining” life when the
next overlay w ill be applied C O N C E P T O F R E M A IN IN G L IF E
For flexible pavement overlay design, the remain­
ing life concept is applied using the equation The A A S H T O remaining life concept is discussed
in detail elsewhere (2) The follow ing abbreviated dis­
cussion is presented for those not fam iliar with that
S N ol = SN n - F rl * SN rff (1 )
document
The remaining life concept was developed to be
where used in a structural deficiency approach to overlay
design In the structural deficiency approach, the
S N 0l = required structural number for the structural requirement for the overlay (S N 0,) is deter­
overlay mined as the difference between the structure needed
S N n = total structural number required, based to support future (design) traffic (S N n) and the struc­
on traffic soils, etc tural capacity o f the existing pavement (SNeff) F rl was
added to the basic structural deficiency equation to
D epartm ent o f C ivil Engineering, U niversity o f A rkansas, 4190 account for future structural damage to the existing
Bell Engineering Center, Fayetteville 72701 pavement

M -l
M-2 Design o f Pavement Structures

1.0

o
o
.7

.5

R Lv Remaining Life (Overlaid Pavement) %

Figure M l. AASHTO Remaining Life Factor Curves (2)

The fundamentals of remaining life are illustrated (SN eff) ° f the pavement at the time of overlay, S N eff
in Figure M 2 using the flexible pavement structural can be expressed as a function of C x and S N 0
number as the measure o f structural capacity The
serviceability o f a pavement decreases with time and
S N eff = C x * S N 0 (4)
traffic from an in itia l value, Po W ithout rehabilita­
tion, the serviceability would eventually reach a “ fail­
ure” level, P f The total number of traffic applications For the A A S H T O Guide, a relationship between C x
to “ failure” is shown as N f and R Lx was developed using the A A S H T O flexible
A t some point p rior to failure, however, an overlay pavement design equation C x and R Lx values were
is placed The traffic applications to that point are x computed for various designs based on present serv­
The remaining life (RLx) is defined as the additional iceable indices at “ failure” (Pf) o f 1 5 to 2 5 These
applications that could have been applied to “ failure” produced a “ best-fit” lelationship
expressed as a fraction o f the total possible applica­
tions That is:
C x = R Lx° 165 (5)

R Lx = (N f - x )/N f (2)
A first step in this investigation was to attempt to
reproduce this relationship C x and R Lx values were
The structural capacity o f the pavement decreases computed for structural numbers ranging from 6 0 to
sim ilarly from S N 0 to S N f A t the time o f overlay, the 2 5, with P f equal to 1 5 and 1 0 A s shown in Figure
pavement structural capacity is S N X A pavement con­ M 3 , these values fit the A A S H T O relationship reason­
dition factor (C x) can be defined as ably well
The A A S H T O remaining life concept, however,
does not use the “ best-fit” relationship Although the
C x = S N X/S N 0 (3)
C x values produced by the relationship were viewed as
being realistic to R Lx values as low as 0 005, the rela­
Since SNX is also the effective structural capacity tionship was abandoned because C x goes to zero at
Appendix M M-3

SERVICEABILITY

LORD APPLICATIONS
CAPA C I TY '
STRUCTURAL.

LORO APPLICATIONS

Figure M2. Illustration of the Remaining Life Concept

M -4 Design o f Pavement Structures

REMAINING LIFE, RL
Figure M3. Comparison of Values from this Investigation with the AASHTO “Best-Fit” Equation

“ failure” (R Lx = zero) A m odified relationship was previously, the structural capacity o f the overlaid
used by A A S H T O The m odified relationship (2) is pavement after y load applications would be

C„ = 1 - 0 7 * e - (RLx+0 85>2 (6) S N y = C y * SN„ (7 )

The best-fit and m odified relationships are com ­ Without the remaining life factor (Fri), S N n is
pared in Figure M 4 In addition to C x not going to S N ol + S N eff Thus, Equation 7 can be written:
zero at “ failure,” the m odified relationship provides a
C x value for a negative remaining life Although the
S N y = C y * S N ol + C y * S N eff (8)
meaning o f a negative remaining life is not clear, this
feature o f the m odified relationship is a necessary (al­
though perhaps erroneous) part of the A A S H T O ap­ A A S H T O (2) argued that this equation is incorrect
plication of remaining life since the existing pavement (SN eff) would lose struc­
tural capacity at a greater rate than would the overlay
(SNol) To “ correct” the equation, A A S H T O stated
APPLICATION OF REMAINING LIFE that C y * SNeff should be replaced by a sim ilar func­
TO OVERLAYS tion that includes the original (new) structural number
o f the existing pavement (S N 0) and a condition factor
The reduction in structural capacity o f the overlaid (Cyx) that is a function o f the traffic applications
pavement is sim ilar to that shown in Figure M 2 Thus, (or remaining life) both before and after the overlay
i f S N n and y were used in place of the S N 0 and x used That is
Appendix M M-5

Figure M4. Comparison of the AASHTO “Best-Fit” and Modified Equations

C yx — f(R-Lx> R Ly) (9 ) viewed as an advance since C x * C y specifies the struc­

tural loss relationship for the existing pavement, while
C yx does not Yet, in order to apply F rl, it was neces­
and
sary to assume an arbitrary relationship (Equation 13,
below)
SNy = Cy * S N ol + CyX * S N„ (10)

REMAINING LIFE FACTOR CURVES

From these, A A S H T O developed a relationship for
F ri in terms o f C yx, C x, and C y The second step in the current investigation was to
verify the remaining life factor curves (Figure M l)
F rl = C yx/( C x * Cy) These curves were developed using Equations 6 and
( 11)
11 However, because C xy is a function o f R Lx and R, y,
A A S H T O has to assume a relationship between the
A t this point, it should be noted that Equation 8 two in order to apply Equation 6 It was assumed that
already included S N 0 and a function o f the traffic be­ the combined remaining life (RLXy) would be equal to
fore and after overlay (C x * C y) Using Equation 4, the remaining life at the time o f overlay (RLx) minus
SNrff in Equation 8 may be replaced by C x * S N 0, the damage done (dy) during the period of overlay
resulting in: That is

SNy = Cy * S N ol + C x * Cy * S N 0 (12) R Lxy = r Lx _ dy (13)

Nevertheless, the introduction of Cyx m ight be Since dy is 1 — R Ly, this equation may be written
M -6 Design o f Pavement Structures

R l^ y — R lx + ^L y — 1 (1 4 ) by the trend o f the S N n values in Table M l However,

after F r, is applied to establish the overlay require­
ment, the general trend for S N o1 is reversed
Initially, this assumption seems reasonable H ow ­
Quite obviously, something is wrong with the
ever, it produces an uneasiness that grows with further
A A S H T O remaining life approach
reflection B y subtracting the fu ll damage done after
overlay, there seems to be no accounting for the reduc­
tion in the rate o f damage that results from the lower
MODIFICATION OF THE REMAINING
load stresses due to the overlay A lso, because both
LIFE APPROACH
R Lx and R Ly generally w ill be less than 0 5, the com­
bined remaining life w ill be negative A negative re­
The final step in the investigation was to identify
m aining life has no meaning Finally, because the
the problem with the concept and to develop a recom­
condition factor relationship itself (Equation 6) is as­
mended correction The apparent source o f the prob­
sumed, this assumption (Equation 13) results in a
lem is in the compounding of assumptions first, with
compounding o f assumptions
the m odification of the C x-R Lx relationship (Equations
Nevertheless, application o f this assumption to­
5 and 6) and, second, w ith the combined remaining
gether with Equations 6 and 11 verified the mathemat­
life relationship (Equation 14)
ical accuracy of Figure M l , including the slope
As an alternative to Equation 14, the follow ing de­
revet sals at the lower values o f R Lx and R Lv
velopment is suggested The curve in Figure M 6 rep­
resents some as yet undefined relationship between C
and R l A t some point (x), the pavement is overlaid
INCONSISTENCIES IN APPLICATION and the existing pavement values are C x and R Lx A fter
the overlay, C of the existing pavement w ill continue
The third step in the current investigation involved to decline from C x, but R L w ill now be 100 This is
application o f the F rJ factors to a hypothetical design represented on Figure M 6 by the revised R L scale
situation to see i f reasonable values and trends were A t the time of the second resurfacing (y), the re­
produced The design situation selected involved a spective values are C yx and R Ly A simple scale trans­
design tia ffic E S A L o f 5 m illio n and an effective formation o f R Ly from the revised scale to the original
structural number for the existing pavement (SN eff) of scale shows that
4 5 The iequired overlay structural numbers (SN 0ls)
were determined for terminal Present Serviceability
Indices (PSIs) ranging from 3 5 to 1 55 The temain- ^Lxy = R lx * R Ly (15)
ing life o f the existing pavement (RLx) was also varied,
using the values 0 0, 0 2, and 0 4 This equation for R Lxy eliminates the need for a nega­
The total structural number iequired (SN n) and re­ tive remaining life The philosophy behind it is sim ilar
maining life of the overlay (RLy) were computed using to the concept of the man who each day walks halfway
the A A S H T O design equation (7) with a “ failure” PSI to his destination H e never arrives As long as the
o f 1 5 A re liability to 50 percent and subgrade resil­ pavement is overlaid p rior to “ failure,” “ failure” is
ient modulus o f 3,000 psi were used to reduce the not reached in any component The existing damage
equation to the original A A S H O Road Test equation condition remains in the existing materials and pro­
and elim inate any potential effects resulting from as­ gresses However, the overlay is designed to slow the
sumptions involved in adding re liability and subgiade rate of additional damage, so that the “ failure” condi­
modulus to the equation To assure accuracy in appli­ tion is reached for the entire pavement
cation, the F rl values were calculated in lieu of being Equations 15 and 11 were used to determine F rl
taken from Figure M l values with both the original C -R L relationship (Equa­
The results of the analyses are listed in Table M l tion 5) and the m odified version (Equation 6) W ith
and displayed graphically in Figure M 5 The slope the original relationship, F r, is always 1 0
reversals seen in Figure M 5 clearly illustrate an incon­
sistency The m ajor inconsistency, however, is the gen­
eral negative slope o f the curves between terminal Frl = (RLxy) '“/(Rlx 165 * RLy
PSIs o f 2 0 to 3 0 For a given design situation, design
= (R Lx * R Ly) ,65/(Rlx * R ly ) 165
to a lower terminal PSI should result in a lower re­
quired structural number This is correctly illustrated = 10 (16)
Appendix M M -7

Table M l. Overlay Computations Using Remaining Life Factors

Design ESAL = 5,000,000 SNeff = 4.5
Terminal Required = 0.2 R lx = 0.4

II
0.0

X
P
PSI SNn F r, SNol F r, SN0| F rl SNoI
3 5 6 65 904 988 2 20 999 2 15 1 00 2 15
3 25 6 02 904 945 1 77 96 7 1 67 987 1 58
3 00 5 59 827 881 1 63 919 1 45 955 1 29
2 50 5 03 603 711 1 83 77 3 1 55 848 1 21
2 25 4 84 465 633 1 .9 9 689 1 74 776 1 35
2 00 4 69 31 7 589 2 04 616 1 92 703 1 53
1 75 4 57 167 605 1 85 576 1 98 642 1 68
1 60 4 50 062 665 1 51 57 8 1 90 615 1 73
1 55 4 48 029 694 1 36 586 1 84 610 1 74

TERMINAL PSI OF OVERLAY

Figure M5. Results of Overlay Analyses Using the AASHTO Remaining Life Factor
M -8 Design o f Pavement Structures

REMAINING LIFE, Original Scale

1 Ry 0
Post—Overlay Scale

Figure M6. Modified Approach for Determining Cxy

W ith the m odified A A S H T O relationship (Equation not a theoretical or fundamental performance relation­
6), the equation is more complicated However, except ship and may, in fact, not even be the “ best-fit” pre­
for very low values o f both R Lx and R Ly, F rl is gener­ diction relationship It is sim ply the best relationship
a lly about 1 0 A t very low R L values, F rl becomes found by the researchers involved in the Road Test
greater than 1 0 (A t R Lx and R Ly equal to 0 0, F rl is using the analytical tools that were available at that
15) time To apply the equation in the fashion used rela­
tive to remaining life represents a very significant ex­
trapolation beyond the data and original intent o f the
OTHER DIFFICULTIES
equation
Inconsistency in application is not the only d iffi­ Second, as it is being applied, the remaining life
culty with the A A S H T O remaining life concept Other concept assumes that a ll materials w ill experience
difficu lties need to be recognized and researched The damage and structural loss at the same rate It is con­
ceivable that at “ failure” a stabilized layer w ill be
first o f these is the application o f the A A S H T O Road
reduced to the equivalency o f a granular layer w hile a
Test performance equation to establish a remaining
granular layer may experience little loss
life-condition relationship
The third d ifficu lty is with the reliance on struc­
The Road Test equation is an em pirical relationship
tural number M any pavement engineers and research­
selected to provide a means o f predicting the perform ­
ance o f the research pavements at the Road Test It is ers have expressed concern with the structural number
Appendix M M-9

approach to pavement design since it was first intro­ REFERENCES

duced The structural number approach assume that
each incremental thickness o f a material provides an 1 AASHTO Guide fo r Design o f Pavement Struc­
equal contribution to the structural capacity of the tures Am erican Association o f State Highway
pavement regardless o f the total thickness or total and Transportation O fficia ls, Washington,
pavement configuration Several studies have shown D C , 1986
that this assumption is erroneous (3-6) 2 Remaining Life Considerations in Overlay De­
These difficu lties are mentioned not to suggest sign A ppendix C C , Vol 2, A A S H T O Guide
abandonment o f the A A S H T O overlay approach but to for Design o f Pavement Structures Am erican
remind the pavement design community o f their exist­ Association o f State Highway and Transporta­
ence, so that the procedures do not become “ etched in tion O fficia ls, Washington, D C , 1986
stone” Additional thought and research in these areas 3 Gom ez, M and Thompson, M , Structural
are needed Coefficients and Thickness Equivalency Ra­
tios Transportation Engineering Series 38
U n iversity o f Illin o is, Urbana-Cham paign,
1983
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 4 Dunn, H D , Jr , A Study o f Four Stabilized
Base Courses Ph D dissertation Department
T h is investigation has demonstrated that the of C iv il Engineering, Pennsylvania State U n i­
A A S H T O remaining life concept produced inconsis­ versity, U n iversity Park, 1974
tent overlay design thicknesses The cause o f the in ­ 5 E llio tt, R P , Rehabilitated AASH (T)0 Road
consistencies appears to be due to a compounding o f Test—Analysis o f Performance Data Reported
assumptions used to produce the remaining life factor in Illinois Physical Research Report 76 Q1P-
(Fri) curves (Figure M l ) A n alternative approach de­ 101 National Asphalt Pavement Association,
veloped as a part o f this investigation found that the Riverdale, M d , 1981
appropriate value for F rl is 1 0 A s a result, it is rec­ 6 Wang, M C and Larson, T D , Performance
ommended that the A A S H T O overlay design approach Evaluation o f Bitum inous Concrete Pavements
be revised to exclude remaining life considerations at the Pennsylvania State Test Track In Trans­
portation Research Record 632, T R B , N a­
tional Research C ou n cil, Washington, D C ,
1977, pp 21-27
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

T h is paper is based on a project entitled “ Develop­ T he contents o f this paper reflect the view o f the author,
ment o f a F lexib le Pavement Overlay Design Proce­ w ho is responsible for the facts and accuracy o f the data
dure U tilizin g Nondestructive Testing Data,” which is presented herein T he contents do not necessarily reflect the
official views o f the A rkansas Highway and T ransportation
being conducted by the Arkansas Highway and Trans­
D epartm ent o r the Federal Highway A dm inistration This
portation Research Center, U n iversity o f Arkansas paper does not constitute a standard, specification, or regu­
The project is sponsored by the Arkansas State lation
Highway and Transportation Department and the U S P ublication o f this paper sponsored by C om m ittee on
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway A d ­ Pavement M anagem ent System s
m inistration
 APPENDIX N
OVERLAY DESIGN EXAMPLES

Nl.O SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM FIELD TESTING

Th is Appendix to the revised A A S H T O overlay design procedure contains several example

overlay designs for each o f the pavement and overlay types addressed by the procedure A total
o f seventy-four examples were developed to demonstrate and validate the procedures These
results were extremely useful in verifying and im proving the overlay design procedures The
example design projects can also be used by future researchers to help verify improved overlay
design procedures
These examples were developed for actual in-service pavements located throughout the
United States Design, traffic, condition, and deflection data were provided for these projects
by 10 State highway agencies State personnel were actively involved in developing these
examples during the development of the revised overlay design procedures The overlay
design procedures were evaluated by the highway agency personnel for clarity and ease o f use
and many comments were incorporated into the procedures
In addition, the overlay thicknesses indicated by the procedures were evaluated with respect
to State highway agencies’ recommendations, based on their design procedures and experi­
ence with overlay performance
Each o f the example projects in this Appendix is identified by the region o f the United
States in w hich it is located and by number w ithin the region The follow ing regional identi­
fiers are used

NE Northeast
SE Southeast
MW M idwest
NW Northwest
sw Southwest

Each o f the regions is represented in the overlay design examples for each pavement and
overlay type to the extent possible Seven separate groupings o f overlays designs are included

Overlay Type Existing Pavement

AC A C pavement
AC Fractured P C C slab
A C and Bonded P C C J P C P and JR C P
A C and Bonded P C C CRCP
AC A C / P C C (composite)
Unbonded P C C JPCP, JRCP, C R C P
J P C P and JR C P A C pavement

A summary o f results obtained is presented for each o f these groups In addition, a single
page spreadsheet showing a ll o f the inputs and outputs for each project is given Lotus 123
spreadsheets were prepared for each o f the above overlay design procedures to aid in the
calculations
Deflection data were used whenever available from the State agency Note that the spread­
sheets only show one to five representative deflection basins so that the number o f calculations
required would be w ithin reason The basins chosen are believed to provide an overlay

N -l
N-2
Design o f Pavement Structures

thickness close to the mean for the nroieot rr , , . .

0, ,. ,_ , project However, this does not im ply that any project
should be represented
nrn„ n m m , . , ,, by this few a number nfhoc.;^ ^ , ,
, IlumDer 01 basins On the contrary, the procedures ,
can be
• , Ta n „ e an^ nUum er Reflection basins and corresponding overlay designs
• , -1 y ,° 1 US rate 1 1S approach and some results, four examples were developed
using deflection data from several deflection basins along the projects
the inHi v vi°W/ n^ r P°*nts are made relative to fie ld testing of the procedures Please see
the individu al summaries for each overlay group for more details

R eliab ility level has a large effect on overlay thickness The design re lia b ility level
m * 6n matC •?, 1 6 overlay S ick n e s s constructed by the agency was approxi-
a ^y percent as 1 ustrated by plots o f 95 percent thickness versus agency overlay
tc ess owever, t ere exists many design situations for w hich it is desirable to
design at a higher or lower level o f re lia b ility
fq T t °Vf!?ay ProJects were designed for huge traffic loadings (more than 25 m illio n
, S. ese projects should be very carefully considered since this is w ell beyond
the lim its o f this overlay design procedure
Results obtained front designing overlays with N D T deflections vs designing from
u°n a
eve a
7, T ey « C C n'^UeS Pro^uced generally sim ilar results However, it is be-
e e ection procedure is by far the most accurate overall and is highly
ecommen e e condition survey method, coupled w ith materials testing, can be
developed to give adequate results
apparent from these results that different clim atic/geographic zones require
a' ae u T m r ay U ^ s e s , even i f a ll other design inputs are exactly the same The
esign uide does not provide a way to deal with this problem Therefore,
eac agency w i need to test the procedures on their pavements and determine their
reasona eness an required adjustments There are many ways to adjust the proce-
J'factor e t c ) UCe over^ay thicknesses ( e g , reliability, resilient modulus,

N 2.0 VARIABILITY OF OVERLAY DESIG N THICKNESS

ALONG A PROJECT

The individual overlay design examples g iven in this A ppendix u tilize from one to five
deflection basins from a project to backcalculate the layer m oduli and to then design the
overlay T h is lim ited number o f deflection basins was used only in the interests o f reducing the
number o f calculations and paperwork involved in reporting the results F or actual projects
where deflection data are available, there w ill often be w ell over 100 deflection basins taken
along the project The overlay design procedures can handle any number o f deflection basins
through the development o f efficient software In fact, it is very inform ative and useful to
calculate overlay thicknesses point by p oin t alon g the project to directly see the variation
involved
The follow ing four examples are provided to illustrate the N D T design approach using all
the deflection basins measured on a project N o te that only the first 20 basins from two o f the
projects were analyzed These examples show the variab ility that can be encountered and its
influence on the design thickness
Appendix N N-3

Project 1

Existing pavement 5 inches A C

5 inches granular base

Design traffic: 642,000 E S A L s (8 years)

Overlay Results See Figure N1 profile o f overlay thickness

M ean overlay thickness
R = 50 percent, 2 3 inches (standard deviation 1 3 inches)
R = 90 percent, 3 7 inches (standard deviation 1 5 inches)

Project 2

Existing pavement 1 inches A C

7 inches granular base

Design traffic 47,500 E S A L s (8 years)

Overlay Results See Figure N 2 profile o f overlay thickness

M ean overlay thickness
R = 50 percent, 2 3 inches (standard deviation 1 1 inches)
R = 90 percent, 3 4 inches (standard deviation 1 3 inches)

Project 3

Existing pavement 3 inches A C

12 inches granular base
Design traffic 800,000 E S A L s (10 years)

Overlay Results See Figure N3 profile o f overlay thickness

M ean overlay thickness
R = 50 percent, 2 3 inches (standard deviation 1 3 inches)
R = 90 percent, 4 2 inches (standard deviation 1 4 inches)

Project 4

Existing pavement: 6 inches A C

8 5 inches granular base
Design traffic 1,000,000 E S A L s (10 years)

Overlay Results: See Figure N 4 profile o f overlay thickness

M ean overlay thickness
R = 50 percent, 4 4 inches (standard deviation 1 8 inches)
R = 90 percent, 6 6 inches (standard deviation 2 0 inches)

The amount o f variation in required A C overlay thickness along a highway pavement from
point to point is quite high, having a coefficient of variation of about 50 percent Therefore, it
is important to measure a number o f deflection basins along any given project to determine the
mean and range o f conditions that exist so that a reasonable overlay thickness can be selected
for the design section These profiles can be used to divide the section into two or more
overlay design sections, i f practical
 o
<

o
o

Figure Nl. Profile of Design Overlay Thickness for AC Overlay of AC Pavement for Project 1
Design o f Pavement Structures
 Appendix N

-ro
o
<

O
o

Figure N2. Profile of Design Overlay Thickness for AC Overlay of AC Pavement for Project 2
N-5
N -6 Design o f Pavement Structures

fO
Mi
u
o>
5s
u
Ph
u
,©
fl
E
0)
I
3
j?
&
o >
O

Ss-
o
o u
2
H
jS*
T3
l>
O
c
.£?
*53
4>
0
o

£
■g

m
£
a>
s.
on
 Appendix N

o
o
o

Figure N4. Profile of Design Overlay Thickness for AC Overlay of AC Pavement for Project 4
N -7
N -8 Design o f Pavement Structures

N 3 .0 AC O V ER LA Y O F AC PAVEM ENT

N D T M eth o d C o n d itio n M eth o d

O ve rla y O verlay
R egion- O v e rla y E x is tin g Design Design T h ickn ess T h ickn ess
P ro je ct Type Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in) (in)

SW-1 AC AC 11,000,000 50 0 0 5
80 0 19
90* 02 2 6
95 0 9 34
99 22 4 6

State design procedure indicates no A C overlay is needed which coi responds to a 90-
percent re lia b ility level The overlay thicknesses shown above reflect one deflection basin
w hich was identified as the highest deflection basin on the project Therefore, other deflection
basins would indicate a thinner overlay requirement Overlay thicknesses obtained using the
condition survey are rough estimates since a condition survey was not performed

SW -2 AC AC 11,000,000 50 0 0
80 0 5 13
90 1 3 2 1
95 1 9 2 7
99* 3 3 4 0

State design procedure indicates a 4 2-inch overlay is needed, w hich corresponds to a 99-
percent re liability level Overlay thicknesses obtained using the condition survey are rough
estimates since a condition survey was not performed

SW -3 AC AC 11 ,000,000 50 16 10
80 3 1 2 5
90 4 0 3 3
95* 4 7 4 0
99 6 1 5 4

State design procedure indicates a 5 4-inch overlay is needed, which corresponds to a 95-
to 99-percent re liability level Overlay thicknesses obtained using the condition survey are
rough estimates since a condition survey was not performed

SW -4 AC AC 11,000,000 50 14 0
80* 2 8 13
90 3 6 2 1
95 4 2 2 8
99 5 5 4 1

State design procedure indicates a 3-inch overlay is needed, which corresponds to an 80- to
90-percent re lia b ility level Overlay thicknesses obtained using the condition survey are rough
estimates since a condition survey was not performed
Appendix N N -9

N D T M e th o d C o n d itio n M eth o d
O v e rla y O ve rla y
R egion- O v e rla y E x is tin g Design Design T h ickn ess T h ickn ess
P ro je ct Type Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in) (in)

M W -1 AC AC 100,000 50 0 14
80 0 9 2 3
90 14 2 8
95* 19 3 3
99 2 8 4 2

A 2-inch overlay is considered reasonable based upon other overlays placed on sim ilar
projects in this area This corresponds to a 95-percent re liab ility level

M W -2 AC AC 150,000 50 17 18
80* 2 8 2 9
90 3 4 3 6
95 40 4 1
99 5 1 5 2

A 2 5-inch overlay is considered reasonable based upon other overlays placed on sim ilar
projects in this area This corresponds to a 80-percent re liab ility level

N W -1 AC AC 2,400,000 50 16 22
80 2 8 3 5
90 3 5 4 2
95 4 1 4 7
99 5 2 5 9

N o agency overlay design available

N W -2 AC AC 2,808,000 50 2 9 2 6
80 4 2 3 9
90 4 9 4 7
95 5 5 5 3
99 67 65

State design procedure gives overlay thicknesses o f 2 to 7 inches for different sections o f
this project Pavement thickness varies from 14 to 23 inches The deflection basin used is an
average for the project
N -10 Design o f Pavement Structures

N D T M e th o d C o n d itio n M eth o d
O v e rla y O ve rla y
R egion- O v e rla y E x is tin g Design Design T h ickn ess T h ickn ess
P ro je ct Type Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in) (in)

N W -3 AC AC 5,550,000 50 0 0
80 0 7 09
90 14 16
95* 2 0 2 2
99 3 2 3 4

State design procedure gives an overlay thickness o f 2 5 inches, w hich corresponds to a 95-
to 99-percent re lia b ility level Pavement thickness varies from 22 to 24 inches The deflection
basin used is an average for the project

N W -4 AC AC 880,000 50 0 5 02
80 1 7 14
90 2 3 2.0
95 2 9 26
99* 4 0 3 6

State design procedure gives an overlay thickness o f 3 5 inches, which corresponds to a 95-
to 99-percent re lia b ility level Pavement thickness varies from 15 to 26 inches The deflection
basin used is an average for the project

N W -5 AC AC 1,360,000 50 3 3 3 2
80* 4 5 44
90 5 1 5 1
95 5 7 5 7
99 6 8 6 8

State design procedure gives an overlay thickness of 4 inches, w hich corresponds to about a
70-percent re lia b ility level Pavement thickness varies from 6 to 10 inches The deflection
basin used is an average for the project

N W -6 AC AC 1,576,000 50 18 2 1
80* 3 0 3 3
90 3 7 4 0
95 4 3 4 6
99 5 4 5 7

State design procedure gives an overlay thickness o f 2 5 inches, w hich corresponds to

about a 70-percent reliability level Pavement thickness varies from 10 to 26 inches The
deflection basin used is an average for the project
Appendix N N - ll

N D T M e th o d C o n d itio n M e th o d
O v e rla y O ve rla y
R egion- O ve rla y E x is tin g Design Design T h ickn ess T h ickn ess
P ro je ct Type Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in) (in)

N E -1 AC AC 931,327 50 0
80 0
90 0 7
95* 13
99 2 4

State constructed a 1 5-inch A C overlay w hich corresponds to a 95-percent re lia b ility level
using condition survey procedures N o deflection data are available Subgrade resilient modu­
lus was estimated from C B R using A A S H T O G uide A ppendix F F

N E -2 AC AC 574,900 50 0
80 0 9
90 14
95 2 0
99* 2 9

State constructed a 3-inch A C overlay w hich corresponds to a 99-percent re lia b ility N o

deflection data are available Subgrade resilient modulus was estimated from C B R using
A A S H T O G uide Appendix F F

N E -3 AC AC 147,816 50 0
(10 years) 80 0
90 0
95* 0 1
99 0 8

State design procedure indicates 0 25-inch overlay thickness required w hich corresponds to
a 95-percent re lia b ility State actually constructed a m inim um 1-inch A C overlay N o deflec­
tion data are available Subgrade resilient modulus was estimated from C B R using A A S H T O
G uide Appendix F F

N E -4 AC AC 7,040,000 50 0
(20 years) 80 11
90* 17
95* 2 3
99 34

State recommends a 2-inch A C overlay plus leveling where necessary w hich corresponds to
a 90- to 95 -percent re lia b ility N o deflection data are available Subgrade resilient modulus
was estimated from C B R using A A S H T O G uide Appendix F F
N-12 Design o f Pavement Structures

Sum m ary of Results for AC Overlay of AC Pavement

1 In general, the revised A A S H T O overlay thicknesses agree with State recommenda­

tions as shown in Figure N 5 Some o f the differences are due to the lack o f consistent
data from some o f the projects For example, some projects had thicknesses that
varied widely, and the correlation between pavement thickness and deflection basins
was unknown
2 The revised A A S H T O overlay thickness designs based upon N D T are generally con­
sistent with those based on the condition survey results Figure N 6 shows the correla­
tion between overlay thickness at the 95-percent level determined by N D T and
condition survey procedures
3 The subgrade resilient modulus has a large effect on the resulting overlay thicknesses
Therefore, it is o f utmost importance to obtain an appropriate modulus value to enter
into the A A S H T O flexible pavement design equation The reduction in backcalculated
modulus by a factor of three appears reasonable Use of too high a value w ill result in
inadequate A C overlay thickness
Some data available from one State permits a direct comparison between laboratory
and backcalculated modulus values

Lab M r Backcalculated MR
Project (psi) (psi) Ratio
NW -2 6,000 13,483 2 25
NW -3 6,000 19,608 3 27
NW -4 4,150 14,085 3 39
NW -5 4,500 14,286 3 17
Averages 5,163 15,365 3 02

Even though the average ratio is 3 0, there is a wide variation Each agency w ill
need to evaluate this ratio, as w ell as other factors, to tailor the design procedure to its
own conditions
4 The design re liability level is very significant The example projects ranged from
collector highways to heavily traveled Interstate-type highways A design re lia b ility
level o f approximately 95 percent usually produced reasonable overlay thicknesses
Appendix N N-13

«s
</>
yj
yi
iy
jea
H
S'
mm
u

CO
CO f
a>
LU
z §
0
1
£
1 $
e

h~ -= S
95 % REL OL THICKNESS, IN

H -o

O S«i
a>

>- o a>

O 3a 4>

z 29 fl in
.*C/3f W
LU a> c/5
p CS
a>
E

*I
cs
©
C/5
k-
5 u

in
Z

.2f
N -]4 Design o f Pavement Structures

u-
£
C/5
0/
i-
S
©
©
ou
Oh

r
t-
CO

c
o
U
.ns
CO flft
CO H
fi
LU Z
z pD
XL -a
0)
C i
0
S
u- .
©
1
COND. SURV. OL THICK., IN

©■
+
■*
OS
«i *2
dJ CQ
C/5

a £
©

© c ©
I— 2 ©
H u ©
Q a
S 1 ■
W IT)
S- ©V
£ C/5
O c
Cm ©
© S
a S
•§£
i- ^

so rU
1
V <
s©
©
s-
©
WO
Appendix N N-15

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -1 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T ( P R O J . 6044)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 8 00 inches SUBGRADE ?
GRAN BASE 3 00
G R AN SUBBASE 10 40
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 21 40
Future design lane E S A L s = 11,000,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M I N E SN,
V a ry tria l S N , u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s .
SN, M r , p si R Z S0 Pi P2 ESAL
4 57 5,622 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,060,851
5 20 5,622 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,306,234
5 53 5,622 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,165,565
5 85 5,622 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,624,755
6 40 5,622 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,358,808
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E p/ M R D 0, m ils E p, p si S N e„
100 8,222 7 65 3 25 16,866 3 10 57 7 65 178,270 5 42
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 33 13 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m SN .,,
A C SURFACE 0 35 1 00 2 80
BASE 0 14 1 00 0 42
SUBBASE 0 11 1 00 1 14
S N eff = 4 36

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = ??? ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 8 00 0 44 3 52
BASE 3 00 0 14 0 42
SUBBASE 10 40 0 00 0
TOTAL 21 40 3 94
SN0 M r , psi Z S0 Pi P2 N is Rl , % CF S N eff
3 94 5,622 0 0 4 2 15 8,375,477
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficient = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 00 0 47
80 0 00 1 90
90 0.25 2 65
95 0 98 3 38
99 2 23 4 63
N -16 Design o f Pavement Structures

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -2 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T ( P R O J . 0512)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 4 50 inches SUBGRADE ?
GRAN BASE 7 50
G R AN SUBBASE 20 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 32 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 11,000,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z S„ Pi P; ESAL
4 75 5,007 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 10,984,277
5 38 5,007 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,035,686
5 73 5,007 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,091,727
6 02 5,007 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,024,719
6 60 5,007 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,025,739
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R until computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E p/ M R D 0, m ils E p, psi S N eff
600 9,171 19 27 4 07 15,022 3 3 09 19 28 46,418 5 18
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 32 89 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 35 1 00 1 58
BASE 0 14 1 00 1 05
SUBBASE 0 11 1 00 2 20
S N eff - 4 83

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = ??? ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 4 50 0 44 1 98
BASE 7 50 0 14 1 05
SUBBASE 20 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 32 00 3 03
SN0 M r , psi Z S0 Pi P2 N, 5 R l , % CF S N .,,
3 03 5,007 0 0 4 2 15 952,248
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 00 0 00
80 0 47 1 26
90 1 26 2 06
95 1 92 2 72
99 3 24 4 03
Appendix N N -17

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -3 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T ( P R O J . 0515)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 5 00 inches SUBGRADE ?
GRAN BASE 6 00
G R AN SUBBASE 20 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 31 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 11,000,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry trial S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
5 21 3,806 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,081,990
5 87 3,806 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,096,518
6 24 3,806 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,166,407
6 54 3,806 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,014,379
7 16 3,806 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,088,213
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M P U T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M r, p si C F A C T O R E p/M r D 0, m ils E p, psi S N ,„
800 8,837 25 70 5 16 11,417 3 2 92 25 69 33,339 4 49
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 a e = 3 1 2 9 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 35 1 00 1 75
BASE 0 14 1 00 0 84
SUBBASE 0 11 1 00 2 20
SNeff = 4 79

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = ??? ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 5 00 0 44 2 2
BASE 6 00 0 14 0 84
SUBBASE 20 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 31 00 3 04
SN„ M r, psi z s0 Pi P2 Nf s R l, % CF S N eff
3 04 3,806 0 0 4 2 15 515,652
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 1 64 0 95
80 3 14 2 45
90 3 98 3 30
95 4 66 3 98
99 6 07 5 39
TV-/# Design o f Pavement Structures

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -4 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T ( P R O J . 0517)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 5 00 inches SUBGRADE ?
GRAN BASE 6 00
G R AN SUBBASE 20 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 31 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 11,000,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , p si R Z s. Pi P2 ESAL
4 74 5,065 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,121,070
5 37 5,065 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,183,641
5 71 5,065 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,100,905
6 00 5,065 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,042,512
6 59 5,065 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 11,191,828
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
________________ A C T U A L ________________ SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, p si C FACTO R E p/ M R D 0, m ils E p, psi S N eff
400 9,437 31 73 4 14 15,196 3 1 71 31 77 25,986 4 13
r = 36 inches
C heck r > 0 7 a e = 26 28 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STRCOEF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 35 1 00 1 75
BASE 014 1 00 0 84
SUBBASE 0 11 1 00 2 20
S N eff = 4 79

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
P a st design lan e E S A L s = ? ?? ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 5 00 0 44 22
BASE 6 00 0 14 0 84
SUBBASE 20 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 31 00 3 04
SN0 M r , psi z s. Pi P2 N is Rl , % CF SN,eff
3 04 5,065 0 0 4 2 15 1,001,038
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 1 38 0 00
80 2 81 132
90 3 59 209
95 4 25 275
99 5 59 4 09
Appendix N N -19

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -1 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T IO N A L A C P A V E M E N T (N E W M A R K DR)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 1 50 inches S U B G R A D E A -6
GRAN BASE 6 00
G R A N SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 7 50
Future design lane E S A L s 100,000 (fle xib le E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
2 62 3,289 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 101,452
3 03 3,289 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 101,875
3 26 3,289 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 100,366
3 47 3,289 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 100,710
3 89 3,289 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 100,712
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M P U T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E p/ M r d 'o, m ils E p, psi S N eff
100 9,000 16 10 6 08 9,868 3 48 20 16 18 475,658 2 63
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 19 55 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 35 1 00 0 53
BASE 0 25 1 00 1 50
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 2 03

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = 95,000 (fle xib le E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N EW ST C F SN„
A C SURFACE 1 50 0 44 0 66
BASE 6 00 0 33 1 98
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 7 50 2 64
SN„ M r , psi z S0 Pi P2 N is Rl, % CF SNeff
2 64 3,289 0 0 45 4 2 15 138,561 31 0 83 2 18
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 00 1 35 1 00
80 0 90 2 28 1 93
90 1 42 2 81 2 45
,95 1 90 3 28 2 93
99 2 85 4 24 3 88
N -20 Design o f Pavement Structures

REVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -2 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T (F IR S T S T R E E T )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 4 00 inches S U B G R A D E A -6
GRAN BASE 8 00
G R A N SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 12 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 150,000 (fle xib le E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , p si R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
3 24 2,256 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 152,158
3 73 2,256 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 150,629
4 01 2,256 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 150,195
4 25 2,256 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 149,762
4 73 2,256 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 150,572
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R until computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T ED
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, p si C FACTO R E p/ M R D 0, m ils E p, psi S N eff
10 + 00 9,096 25 61 8 96 6,768 3 14 58 25 62 98,675 2 50
r = 36 inches
C heck r > 0 7 ae = 20 93 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N ef,
AC SURFACE 0 33 1 00 1 32
BASE 0 14 1 00 1 12
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 2 44

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = 90,000 (fle xib le E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N EW ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 4 00 0 44 1 76
BASE 8 00 0 14 1 12
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 12 00 2 88
SN0 M r , psi z S0 Pi P2 N 1S Rl, % CF S N eff
2 88 2,256 0 0 45 4 2 15 105,000 14 0 73 2 09
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 1 69 1 82 2 62
80 2 81 2 93 3 73
90 3 44 3 57 4 37
95 3 99 4 11 4 91
99 5 08 5 20 6 00
Appendix N N-21

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N W -1 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T ________________________________

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 4 25 inches S U B G R A D E S A N D Y S IL T , S A N D Y G R A V E L
GRAN BASE 8 00
G R AN SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 12 25
Future design lane E S A L s = 2,400,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z S„ Pi P2 ESAL
3 60 5,634 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,417,312
4 14 5,634 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,430,778
4 44 5,634 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,429,228
4 69 5,634 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,408,097
5 19 5,634 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,403,245
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, p si C FACTO R E p/ M r e i0, m ils E p, psi SNeff
100 9,000 12 80 3 55 16,901 3 8 45 12 80 142,817 2 88
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 17 95 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 35 1 00 1 49
BASE 0 14 1 00 1 12
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
SNeff = 2 61

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = 400,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N EW ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 4 25 0 44 1 87
BASE 8 00 0 14 1 12
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 12 25 2 99
SN0 M r , psi z S0 Pi P2 N ,S Rl , % CF SNeff
2 99 5,634 0 0 45 4 2 15 1140161 65 0 93 2 78
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 1 63 2 26 1 85
80 2 86 3 48 3 08
90 3 54 4 16 3 76
95 4 11 4 73 4 33
99 5 25 5 87 5 47
N-22 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N W -2 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T IO N A L A C P A V E M E N T (P E LT O N D A M R O A D )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 5 50 inches S U B G R A D E S A N D Y S IL T , S A N D Y G R A V E L
GRAN BASE 12 00
GRAN SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 17 50
Future design lane E S A L s = 2,808,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ P. P2 ESAL
4 01 4,494 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,805,583
4 58 4,494 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,793,711
4 90 4,494 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,804,877
5 17 4,494 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,806,109
5 70 4,494 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 2,811,508
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M P U T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D „, m ils D r , m ils M R, p si C FACTO R E p/ M R D „, m ils E p, psi S N eff
1 9,000 24 10 4 45 13,483 3 3 08 24 11 41,528 2 73
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 18 30 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 30 1 00 1 65
BASE 0 10 1 00 1 20
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 2 85

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = ??? (flexible E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN „
A C SURFACE 5 50 0 44 2 42
BASE 12 00 0 14 1 68
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 17 50 4 10
SN„ M r , psi z S0 Pi P2 Ni s Rl, % CF S N eff
4 1 4,494 0 0 4 2 15 6,715,080
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficient = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 2 92 2 64
80 4 21 3 93
90 4 94 4 66
95 5 55 5 27
99 6 76 6 48
Appendix N N-23

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N W -3 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T IO N A L A C P A V E M E N T (JO S E P H ST IN T E R C H A N G E )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 7 00 inches S U B G R A D E A -7-6
GRAN BASE 16 00
G R AN SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 23 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 5,550,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry trial S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
3 89 6,536 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 5,520,953
4 46 6,536 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 5,578,464
4 77 6,536 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 5,556,152
5 04 6,536 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 5,588,225
5 56 6,536 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 5,580,037
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T ED
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E p/ M r D 0, m ils E p, psi S N eff
1 9,000 14 74 3 06 19,608 3 3 31 14 72 64,902 4 16
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 24 35 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 35 1 00 2 45
BASE 0 10 1 00 1 60
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 4 05

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = ??? (fle xible E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN„
A C SURFACE 7 00 0 44 3 08
BASE 16 00 0 14 2 24
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 23 00 5 32
SN„ M r , psi z S„ Pi P2 N ,s R l, % CF SNeff
5 32 6,536 0 0 4 2 15 *********
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 00 0 00
80 0 68 0 93
90 1 39 1 64
95 2 00 2 25
99 3 18 3 43
N -24 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N W -4 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T ( K I W A S P R IN G S )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 4 50 inches SUBGRADE S IL T Y S A N D
GRAN BASE 16 00
G R AN SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 20 50
Future design lane E S A L s = 880,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry trial S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z So Pi P2 ESAL
3 27 4,695 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 880,995
3 77 4,695 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 881,307
4 06 4,695 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 889,890
4 30 4,695 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 884,951
4 78 4,695 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 885,927
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R until computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, p si C FACTOR E p/ M R D 0, m ils E p, psi S N eff
A V E DEF 9,000 25 52 4 26 14,085 3 2 52 25 53 35,493 3 03
r = 36 inches
C heck i > 0 7 ae = 19 96 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
AC SURFACE 0 35 1 00 1 58
BASE 0 10 1 00 1 60
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 3 18

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = ??? (fle xible E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
AC SURFACE 4 50 0 44 1 98
BASE 16 00 0 14 2 24
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 20 50 4 22
SN„ M r , psi z S„ Pi P2 Nf 5 R L, % CF S N eff
4 22 4,695 0 0 4 2 15 9,237,517
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficient = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 54 0 22
80 1 68 1 35
90 2 34 2 01
95 2 88 2 56
99 3 97 3 65
Appendix N N-25

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N W -5 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T IO N A L A C P A V E M E N T (B A N K S S C L)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 8 00 inches S U B G R A D E A -4
GRAN BASE 4 00
G R A N SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 12 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 1,362,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z S„ Pi P2 ESAL
3 49 4,762 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,352,984
4 02 4,762 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,363,644
4 32 4,762 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,373,199
4 57 4,762 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,368,562
5 06 4,762 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,359,575
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
________________ A C T U A L ______________________ S U B G R A D E ___________ T R I A L C O M P U T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E p/ M R D „, m ils E p, p si S N eff
AVE 9,000 22 76 4 20 14,286 3 3 82 22 74 54,571 2 05
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 13 77 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR COEF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 22 1 00 1 76
BASE 0 08 1 00 0 32
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 2 08

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = ??? (flexible E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N EW ST C F SN 0
AC SURFACE 8 00 0 44 3 52
BASE 4 00 0 14 0 56
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 12 00 4 08
SN0 M r , psi z S0 Pi Pi N 1s Rl , % CF SN,eff
4 08 4,762 0 0 4 2 15 7,'
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 3 28 3 20
80 4 48 4 41
90 5 16 5 09
95 5 73 5 66
99 6 84 6 77
N -26 Design o f Pavement Structures

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N W -6 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T IO N A L A C P A V E M E N T (S A LIS B U R Y JC T )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 4 00 inches S U B G R A D E A -4 , A - 6 , A -7-6
GRAN BASE 14 00
G R AN SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 18 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 1,576,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
3 59 4,739 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,591,144
4 11 4,739 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,553,384
4 42 4,739 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,578,705
4 68 4,739 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,589,225
5 17 4,739 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 1,565,579
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D „, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E P/ M R D 0, m ils E p, p si S N eff
AVE 9,000 23 57 4 22 14,218 3 2 90 23 62 41,232 2 80
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 18 44 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N cff
A C SURFACE 0 32 1 00 1 28
BASE 0 10 1 00 1 40
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 2 68

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = ??? (fle xible E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 4 00 0 44 1 76
BASE 14 00 0 14 1 96
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 18 00 3 72
SN0 M r , psi z S0 Pi P2 N 1S Rl , % CF SNrff
3 72 4,739 0 0 4 2 15 3,679,271
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 1 80 2 07
80 2 98 3 25
90 3 69 3 95
95 4 28 4 55
99 5 39 5 66
Appendix N N -27

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N E -1 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T (SR 756-01E)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 3 00 inches SUBGRADE: C BR = 8
B IT B A S E 2 00 M R E S T AASHTO APP FF
G R A N SUBBASE 10 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 15 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 931,327 (fle xib le E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r, psi R Z S0 Pi P2 ESAL
2 79 8,100 50 0 0 45 4 2 3 947,912
3 30 8,100 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 3 962,019
3 60 8,100 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 3 960,669
3 85 8,100 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 3 942,538
4 37 8,100 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 3 941,446
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M P U T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E p/ M r D 0, m ils E p, psi SN .,,
0 0 00 0 00 ERR 3 0 00 ERR ERR ERR
r = 0 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 30 1 00 0 90
BASE 0 30 1 00 0 60
SUBBASE 0 18 1 00 1 80
S N eff = 3 30

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = 0 (fle xible E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 3 00 0 0
BASE 2 00 0 00 0
SUBBASE 10 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 15 00 0 00
SN0 M r , psi z s„ Pi P2 N is R l, % CF S N eff
0 ERR 0 0 45 4 2 15 ERR ERR ERR ERR
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 00
80 0 00
90 0 68
95 1 25
99 2 43
N-28 Design of Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N E -2 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T (S R 239-04M )________________

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 2 50 inches SUBGRADE CBR = 5
GRAN BASE 0 00 M R EST A A SH T O A PP FF
G R AN SUBBASE 800
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 1050
Future design lane E S A L s = 574,900 (fle xib le E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry trial S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
2 81 5,800 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 576,370
3 25 5,800 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 579,932
3 50 5,800 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 576,358
3 74 5,800 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 595,324
4 16 5,800 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 575,180
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E p/ M r Do, m ils E p, psi S N eff
0 0 00 0 00 ERR 3 0 00 ERR ERR ERR
r — 0 inches
C h eck l > 0 7 ae = inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 35 1 00 0 88
BASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
SUBBASE 0 25 1 00 2 00
S N eff = 2 88

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = 0 (fle xible E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 2 50 0 0
BASE 0 00 0 00 0
SUBBASE 8 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 10 50 0 00
SN0 M r , psi z S0 Pi P2 Nf s R L, % CF S N eff
0 ERR 0 0 45 4 2 15 ERR ERR ERR ERR
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficient = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 00
Appendix N N-29

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N E -3 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T (S R 2 6 -06 M )_________________

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
A C SURFACE 4 00 inches SUBGRADE: CBR = 7 5
STONE BASE 800 M R EST AASH TO APP FF
G R AN SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 1200
Future design lane E S A L s = 147,816 (fle xib le E S A L s , 10-Y E A R D E S I G N L IF E )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
2 00 7,800 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 149,952
2 32 7,800 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 151,551
2 50 7,800 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 150,256
2 66 7,800 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 149,807
2 99 7,800 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 149,450
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
________________ A C T U A L ______________________ S U B G R A D E ___________ T R I A L C O M P U T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M R, psi C FACTO R E P/ M R D 0, m ils E p, p si S N eff
0 0 00 0 00 ERR 3 0 00 ERR ERR ERR
r = 0 inches
Ch eck r > 0 7 ae = inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STRCO EF D R A IN m S N eff
A C SURFACE 0 30 1 00 1 20
BASE 0 18 1 00 1 44
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 2 64

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = 0 (fle xible E S A L s )
LAYER T H IC K , in NEW ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 4 00 0 0
BASE 800 0 00 0
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 12 00 0 00
SN0 M r , p si Z S0 P] P2 Ni 5 Rl , % CF S N eff
0 ERR 0 0 45 4 2 15 ERR ERR ERR ERR
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficient = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 00
80 0 00
90 000
95 0 05
99 0 80
N -30 Design o f Pavement Structures

R E V I S E D C H A P T E R 5 A A S H T O D E S I G N G U I D E O V E R L A Y D E S I G N ___________

N E -4 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T ( R O U T E 9, 49-104)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
AC SURFACE 4 00 inches SUBGRADE ?
B IT B A S E 3 00
C A C L2 STAB 4 00
G R AN SUBBASE 14 50
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 25 50
Future design lane E S A L s = 7,040,000 (20-Y E A R D E S IG N , F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s. Pi P2 ESAL
3 45 10,000 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 7,051,276
3 97 10,000 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 7,043,437
4 26 10,000 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 7,009,068
4 51 10,000 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 7,005,057
5 01 10,000 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 7,090,364
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M I N E S N etf B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D „, m ils D r , m ils M R, p si C FACTOR E P/ M R D 0, m ils E,p, psi S N eff
0 0 00 0 00 ERR 0 0 00 ERR ERR ERR
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y C O N D I T I O N S U R V E Y M E T H O D
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m SN .,,
A C SURFACE 0 40 1 00 1 60
B IT B A S E 0 30 1 00 0 90
SUBBASE 0 14 1 00 0 56
SUBBASE 0 11 1 00 0 44
SNeff = 3 50

(continued on next page)

Appendix N N-31

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N E -4 A C O V E R L A Y O F C O N V E N T I O N A L A C P A V E M E N T ( R O U T E 9, 49-104) (continued)

D E T E R M I N E S N eff B Y R E M A I N I N G L I F E M E T H O D
Past design lane E S A L s = 0 (fle xib le E S A L s )
LAYER T H I C K , in N E W ST C F SN0
A C SURFACE 0 00 0 0
BASE 0 00 0 00 0
SUBBASE 0 00 0 00 0
TOTAL 0 00 0 00
SN0 M r , p si z s0 Pi p2 N, s R l, % CF S N eff
0 ERR 0 0 45 4 2 15 ERR ERR ERR ERR
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N NDT C O N D IT IO N R E M L IF E
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in M E T H O D , in
50 0 00
80 1 07
90 1 73
95 2 30
99 3 43
N-32 Design o f Pavement Structures

N 4.0 AC OVERLAY OF FRACTURED SLAB PCC PAVEMENT

Overlay
Region- Overlay Existing Design Design Thickness
Project Type Pavement ESALs Reliability (in)
M W -3 AC JR C P 6,700,000 50 4 1
(10 years) 80 5 5
90 6 3*
95 6 9*
99 8 2*

S H R P L T P P section that was overlaid with 6 and 8 inches of A C after being rubblized

SW -5 AC JR C P 9,532,300 50 6 1
(15 years) 80 7 6
90 84
95 9 1
99 10 6

N o State design is available Overlay design is for rubblized JR C P

M W -4 AC JR C P 318,000 50 0 0
(20 years) 80 0 7
90 13
95 17
99 2 8*

State recommends a 2 75-inch A C overlay after pavement is broken and seated

S W -6 AC JPC P 7,370,000 50 2 4
(20 years) 80 3 9*
90 4 7*
95 5 4
99 6 8

State recommends a 4 2-inch A C overlay plus crack relief fabric after cracking and seating

SW -7 AC JP C P 7,370,000 50 12
(20 years) 80 2 6
90 3 4
95 4 0*
99 5 4

State recommends a 4 2-inch A C overlay plus crack re lie f fabric after cracking and seating
Appendix N N-33

O verlay
R egion- O ve rla y E x is tin g Design Design Th ickn ess
P ro je ct Type Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in)

S W -8 AC JPC P 7,370,000 50 17
(20 years) 80 3 2
90 4 0*
95 4 7
99 6 1

State recommends a 4 2-inch A C overlay plus crack re lie f fabric after cracking and seating

N E -5 AC JPC P 329,288 50 0
80 0 6
90 10
95 13
99 2 1

State constructed 3 5-inch A C overlay after crack and seating Subgrade soil has C B R =
15 which results in high estimated resilient modulus (12,000 psi) and thin overlay N o
deflection data available
N -34 D esign o f Pavement Structures

Summary of Results for Fractured Slab PCC Overlay Designs

1 There are not enough projects to judge the adequacy o f the procedure The lim ited
results show that the required A C overlay thickness o f fractured slab P C C appears
reasonable for most projects and generally agrees with the State recommendations A
design thickness at 95-percent re liab ility vs the agency recommendation is given in
Figure N 7 along with data points from the conventional A C overlays previously
shown
2 The backcalculated subgrade m oduli were a ll divided by 4 (C = 0 25) w hich is
apparently needed to give overlay adequate thickness One section in the Northeast
that had a C B R = 15 (and a corresponding estimated modulus o f 12,000 psi), resulted
in a very thin overlay requirement It is believed that the subgrade modulus is too high
for this project
3 The design re lia b ility level is very significant For these projects, a design reliability
level o f 90 to 95 percent appears to provide reasonable overlay thicknesses, and in
general agrees with agency recommendations
95 % REL OL THICKNESS, IN
Appendix N
N-35
N -36 Design o f Pavement Structures

R E V IS E D C H A P T E R 5 A A S H T O D E S IG N G U ID E O V E R L A Y D E S IG N

M W -3 A C O V E R L A Y O F R U B B L I Z E D J R C P P A V E M E N T (157)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
R U B B L IZ E D P C C 10 00 inches S U B G R A D E A -6
G RAN BASE 6 00
SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 16 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 6,700,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s. Pi P2 ESAL
4 10 5,556 50 0 0 49 4 5 2 5 6,833,081
4 70 5,556 80 0 841 0 49 4 5 2 5 6,839,800
5 05 5,556 90 1 282 0 49 4 5 2 5 6,982,040
5 35 5,556 95 1 645 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,096,596
5 90 5,556 99 2 327 0 49 4 5 2 5 6,895,101
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E S U B G R A D E M R B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T ED
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M r, psi C FACTO R E p/ M R D 0, m ils E p, psi
1 9,000 4 10 2 70 22,222 4 38 80 4 10 862,222
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 38 14 inches*

D E T E R M I N E S N eff
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m SNeff
R U B B L IZ E D P C C 0 20 1 00 2 00
SUBBASE 0 05 1 00 0 30
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
SNeff = 2 30________________________

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficient = 0 44
D E S IG N C O N D IT IO N
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in
50 4 09
80 545
90 625
95 693
99 818
* Sensors spaced at farther distances were not available, or they would have been used
Appendix N N -37

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -5 A C O V E R L A Y O F R U B B L I Z E D C R C P (1610)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
R U B B L IZ E D P C C 10 00 inches S U B G R A D E - ???
G R AN BASE 6 00
SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 16 00
Future design lane E S A L s 9,532,300 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
4 70 4,344 50 0 0 49 4 5 2 5 9,983,205
5 35 4,344 80 0 841 0 49 4 5 2 5 9,934,515
5 70 4,344 90 1 282 0 49 4 5 2 5 9,733,044
6 00 4,344 95 1 645 0 49 4 5 2 5 9,573,480
6 65 4,344 99 2 327 0 49 4 5 2 5 9,919,464
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E S U B G R A D E M R B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T ED
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M r , p si C FACTO R E p/ M R D 0, m ils E p, psi
1 0 0 00 0 00 ERR 0 0 00 ERR ERR
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = inches

D E T E R M I N E S N eff
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
R U B B L IZ E D P C C 0 20 1 00 2 00
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
SNeff = 2 00________________________

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N C O N D IT IO N
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in
50 6 14
80 7 61
90 8 41
95 9 09
99 10 57
N -38 Design o f Pavement Structures

R E V IS E D C H A P T E R 5 A A S H T O D E S IG N G U ID E O V E R L A Y D E S IG N

M W -4 A C O V E R L A Y O F B R E A K / S E A T E D J R C P (JA C -32 -1 2 .4 7 )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
R U B B L IZ E D P C C 8 00 inches S U B G R A D E : A -6
SUBBASE 6 00
SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 14 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 318,000 ( F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z S0 Pi P2 ESAL
2 70 4,885 50 0 0 49 4 5 2 5 336,217
3 15 4,885 80 0 841 0 49 4 5 2 5 346,855
3 40 4,885 90 1 282 0 49 4 5 2 5 345,152
3 60 4,885 95 1 645 0 49 4 5 2 5 332,752
4 05 4,885 99 2 327 0 49 4 5 2 5 337,800
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E S U B G R A D E M R B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M PU T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D „, m ils D r , m ils M r , psi C FACTO R E p/ M r D 0, m ils E p, psi
10,376 5 27 3 54 19,540 4 53 50 5 27 1,045,416
r = 36 inches
C heck r > 0 7 a e = 37 16 inches*

D E T E R M I N E S N eff
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
B R E A K /S E A T E D 0 25 1 00 2 00
SUBBASE 0 14 1 00 0 84
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff - 2 84________________________
D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N C O N D IT IO N
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in
50 0 00
80 0 70
90 127
95 173
99 275

*Sensors spaced at farther distances were not available, or they would have been used
Appendix N N -39

R E V IS E D C H A P T E R 5 A A S H T O D E S IG N G U ID E O V E R L A Y D E S IG N _____________________

S W -6 A C O V E R L A Y O F C R A C K E D / S E A T E D J P C P ( P R O J S T N 353) ________________________

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
R U B B L IZ E D P C C 8 20 inches
C T BASE 3 70
SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 11 90
Future design lane E S A L s = 7,370,000 (2/3 O F 11,000,000 U S E D A S F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N f u n til com puted E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , p si R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
4 50 4,350 50 0 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,364,787
5 15 4,350 80 0 841 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,516,147
5 50 4,350 90 1 282 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,452,560
5 80 4,350 95 1 645 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,401,524
6 40 4,350 99 2 327 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,354,079
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E S U B G R A D E M R B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M P U T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M r , p si C FACTO R E p/ M r D 0, m ils E p, psi
8,952 6 31 3 43 17,399 4 44 00 6 32 765,574
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 29 70 inches

D E T E R M I N E S N cff
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
R U B B L IZ E D P C C 0 35 1 00 2 87
C T SUBBASE 0 15 1 00 0 56
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
SNeff = 3 43
D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N C O N D IT IO N
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in
50 2 44
80 3 92
90 4 72
95 5 40
99 6 76
N -40 Design o f Pavement Structures

R E V IS E D C H A P T E R 5 A A S H T O D E S IG N G U ID E O V E R L A Y D E S IG N

S W -7 A C O V E R L A Y O F C R A C K / S E A T E D J P C P ( P R O J 7456)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
C R A C K /S E A T E D JP C P 8 20 inches
C T BASE 4 80
SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 13 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 7,370,000 (2/3 O F 11,000,000 U S E D A S F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r , psi R Z s„ Pi P2 ESAL
4 45 4,597 50 0 0 49 4 5 25 7,743,986
5 05 4,597 80 0 841 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,401,737
5 40 4,597 90 1 282 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,384,677
5 70 4,597 95 1 645 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,370,609
6 30 4,597 99 2 327 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,390,745
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E S U B G R A D E M R B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M P U T E D
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M r , psi C FACTO R E p/ M r D 0, m ils E p, psi
8,496 3 68 3.08 18,390 4 114 00 3 68 2,096,416
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = 44 32 inches*

D E T E R M I N E S N eff
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
C R A C K /S E A T JP C P 0 35 1 00 2 87
C T SUBBASE 0 22 1 00 1 06
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 3 93________________________

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficient = 0 44
D E S IG N C O N D IT IO N
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in
50 119
80 255
90 335
95 4 03
99 540
♦Sensors spaced at farther distances were not available, or they would have been used
Appendix N N-41

R E V IS E D C H A P T E R 5 A A S H T O D E S IG N G U ID E O V E R L A Y D E S IG N

S W -8 A C O V E R L A Y O F C R A C K / S E A T E D J P C P (3005, S T N 305)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
R U B B L IZ E D P C C 8 20 inches
C T BASE 3 70
SUBBASE 0 00
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 1190
Future design lane E S A L s = 7,370,000 (2/3 O F 11,000,000 U S E D A S F L E X I B L E E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SNf
V a ry tria l S N f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SNf M r, psi R Z s. Pi P2 ESAL
4 45 4,522 50 0 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,453,483
5 10 4,522 80 0 841 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,656,722
5 45 4,522 90 1 282 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,615,343
5 75 4,522 95 1 645 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,581,902
6 35 4,522 99 2 327 0 49 4 5 2 5 7,567,726
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E S U B G R A D E M R B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry tria l E p/ M R u n til computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M P U T ED
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M r , psi C FACTO R E p/ M r D 0, m ils E p, psi
9,144 3 89 3 37 18,089 4 157 00 3 89 2,839,976
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 a e = 45 13 inches*

D E T E R M I N E S N eff
LAYER STR CO EF D R A IN m S N eff
C R A C K /S E A T JP C P 0 35 1 00 2 87
C T SUBBASE 0 22 1 00 0 81
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 3 68

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural co efficien t = 0 44
D E S IG N C O N D IT IO N
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in
50 174
80 322
90 4 01
95 4 70
99 606
♦Sensors spaced at farther distances were not available, or they would have been used
N-42 Design of Pavement Structures

R EV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N E -5 A C O V E R L A Y O F C R A C K / S E A T J P C P (SR 611-27M )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N
C R A C K /S E A T JP C P 10 00 inches S U B G R A D E : C B R = 15
SUBBASE 0 00 M R = 12,000 PSI
SUBBASE 0 00 (A A S H T O , A P P E N D IX FF)
T O T A L T H IC K N E S S 10 00
Future design lane E S A L s = 329,288 (fle xib le E S A L s )

D E T E R M IN E SN,
V a ry tria l S N , u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
SN, M r, psi R Z S„ Pi P2 ESAL
1 93 12,000 50 0 0 45 4 2 2 5 330,546
2 25 12,000 80 0 841 0 45 4 2 2 5 342,787
2 42 12,000 90 1 282 0 45 4 2 2 5 335,762
2 59 12,000 95 1 645 0 45 4 2 2 5 346,645
2 90 12,000 99 2 327 0 45 4 2 2 5 337,721
T R IA L IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T

D E T E R M IN E S U B G R A D E M R B Y N D T M E T H O D
V a ry trial E p/ M R until computed D 0 equals actual value
ACTUAL SUBGRADE T R IA L C O M P U T ED
S T A T IO N L O A D , lb s D 0, m ils D r , m ils M r,psi C FACTO R E p/ M r D 0, m ils E p, psi
0 0 00 0 00 ERR 0 0 00 ERR ERR
r = 36 inches
C h eck r > 0 7 ae = inches

D E T E R M I N E S N et{
LAYER STR C O EF D R A IN m SN .,,
C R A C K /S E A T JP C P 0 20 1 00 2 00
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
SUBBASE 0 00 1 00 0 00
S N eff = 2 00

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
A C O L structural coefficient = 0 44
D E S IG N C O N D IT IO N
R E L IA B IL IT Y M E T H O D , in
50 0 00
80 0 57
90 0 95
95 1 34
99 2 05
Appendix N N-43

N 5 .0 AC O V E R LA Y A N D BO N D ED P C C O V E R LA Y O F JP C P AN D JR C P

B onded
A C O ve rla y P C C O verlay
R egion- E x is tin g Design Design T h ickn ess T h ickn ess
P ro je ct Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in) (in)

M W -5 JR C P 424,000 50 0 0
80 0 0
90* 0 0
95 0 8 04
99 2 4 12

State design procedure indicates no structural overlay is needed for this pavement

SW -9 JR C P 17,668,000 50 0 0
(20 years) 80 14 0 6
90 2 8 14
95* 3 6 18
99 5 5 3 0

Agency recommends a 4-inch A C overlay for a 20-year design

SW -10 JR C P 12,800,000 50 0 0
(15 years) 80 03 0 2
90 18 0 8
95 2 8 14
99 4 5 24

Agency recommends a 4-inch A C overlay for a 20-year design

SW-11 JPC P 11 ,000,000 50 3 8 1 9

80 5 6 3 0
90 65 3 6
95 74 4 2
99 8 8 5 2

N o agency recommendations for conventional A C overlay Recommendations for A C over­

lay over crack and seat J P C P was 4 2 inches N o condition data are available for this project

SW -12 JPC P 11 ,000,000 50 3 2 16

80 5 1 2 7
90 60 3 3
95 6 8 3 8
99 83 4 8

N o agency recommendations for conventional A C overlay Recommendations for A C over­

lay over crack and seat JP C P was 4 2 inches N o condition data are available for this project
N-44 Design o f Pavement Structures

B onded
A C O v e rla y P C C O v e rla y
R egion- E x is tin g Design Design T h ickn ess T h ickn ess
P ro je ct Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in) (in)

SW -13 JPC P 11 ,000,000 50 4 9 15

80 5 9 26
90 66 3 7
95 8 1 4 7
99 83 4 8

N o agency recommendations for conventional A C overlay Recommendations for A C over­

lay over crack and seat J P C P was 4 2 inches N o condition data are available for this project

SE-1 JP C P 25,500,000 50 16 0 8
80 36 18
90 4 5 2 4
95 5 3 2 8
99 7 0 4 0

N o agency recommendations for this overlay design

M W -6 JR C P 22,834,000 50 4 0 2 1
80 6 1 3 4
90 7 2 4 1
95* 80 4 7
99 9 7 5 9

State constructed 4 5-inch bonded P C C overlay N o deflection data are available

M W -7 JR C P 10 ,000,000 50 0 0
(10 years) 80 10 0 5
90 22 11
95* 3 2 16
99 4 6 2 4

State policy design for this pavement is a 3 25-inch A C overlay

N W -7 JR C P 80,000,000 50 4 7 2 5
(20 years) 80 62 3 4
90 7 0 3 9
95 7 6 4 4
99 89 5 2

Extrem ely high traffic The deflection basin used is an average for the project Existing
pavement is in fair to poor condition Low J factor used to determine D f , since the State has
observed that in this m ild climate, J R C P pavements perform much better than A A S H T O
design equation predicts State recommended 5-inch A C overlay, based on good performance
o f 5-inch A C overlay on adjacent section o f highway, in service 8 years It is unlikely,
however, that a 5-inch A C overlay could handle 80 m illio n E S A L s
Appendix N N-45

Bonded
A C O v e rla y P C C O v e rla y
Region- E x is tin g Design Design T h ickn ess T h ickn ess
P ro je ct Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in) (in)

N W -8 JR C P 20 ,000,000 50 2 5 12
(15 years) 80 4 1 2 1
90 4 9 2 6
95 5 5* 3 0
99 6 8 3 8

State constructed 6-inch A C overlay in 1976, has carried 20 m illio n E S A L s since overlay,
current PSI is 3 5 The deflection basin used is average for bare J R C P project o f same design
Low J factor used to determine D f , since the State has observed that in this m ild climate, JR C P
pavements perform much better than A A S H T O design equation predicts

N E -6 JR C P 12,255,000 50 02 0 1
(20 years) 80 2 2 11
90 3 2* 16
95 4 0 2 1
99 5 5 3 0

State recommends a 3-inch A C overlay N o deflection data are available

N E -7 JR C P 16,000,000 50 0 0
(20 years) 80 17 0 8
90 2 8* 14
95 3 7* 19
99 5 1 2 7

State recommends an A C overlay o f at least 3 inches

N E -8 JR C P 4,650,000 50 0 0
(10 years) 80 19 0 9
90 2 8* 14
95 3 7* 19
99 5 2 2 8

State design procedure indicates 2 5-inch A C overlay required State constructed 3 5-inch
A C overlay N o deflection data are available Subgrade resilient modulus was estimated from
C B R using A A S H T O G uide Appendix F F

N E -9 JR C P 10,050,000 50 04 02
(10 years) 80 2 4 12
90 3 5* 18
95 4 4 2 3
99 60 3 3

State design procedure indicates 3-inch A C overlay required State constructed 3 5-inch A C
overlay N o deflection data are available Subgrade resilient modulus was estimated from C B R
using A A S H T O G uide Appendix F F
N -46 Design o f Pavement Structures

Sum m ary of Results for AC Overlay and Bonded PCC Overlay of JP C P and JR C P

1 O verall it appears that the revised A A S H T O overlay design procedures produce rea­
sonable conventional A C overlay and bonded P C C overlay thicknesses for jointed
P C C pavements that are consistent with State recommendations For example, no
overlay requirement is shown for project M W -5 for a re liab ility level below 95 per­
cent, which is consistent with the State’s assessment that the project does not need an
overlay In another example, the bonded P C C overlay thickness indicated for project
M W -6 at the 95-percent re lia b ility level matches very closely the bonded overlay
thickness actually constructed by that State Project M W -7 is another good example:
the 3 2-inch overlay requirement indicated at the 95-percent re lia b ility level matches
the State’s design for 10 years and 10 m illio n E S A L s A survival analysis o f overlays
in this State has shown that this type of overlay lasts an average of 11 9 years and
carries an average o f 18 m illio n E S A L s A plot o f design A C overlay thickness vs
agency specified overlay thickness for these projects is shown in Figure N 8
2 Specific difficulties in A C and bonded P C C overlay thickness design include the
sensitivity o f the J factor for load transfer and the necessity of imposing practical
m inim um and maximum values for the P C C elastic modulus, the P C C modulus o f
rupture, and the effective k-value
3 The design re liability level is very significant M ost o f the projects were InterState-
type highways A design re liab ility level of 95 percent appears to be reasonable for A C
overlays o f J R C P and JP C P
4 Specific examples o f overlays that appear to be too thick are projects SW -11, SW-12,
and SW-13 These are located in a State with a very m ild climate, w hich may have a
very significant effect on im proving overlaid pavement performance and reducing
overlay thickness requirements This could be addressed by using a lower design
re lia b ility level, or by using a lower J factor to determine D f
Appendix N N -47

Ah
U
*u
©

8
1
©
.a
2
H
CO Js*
T2
CO © CA

LU
z S<
S
©
OD

o ■s£
5 ©
O X5
X P5 S
H
95 % REL OL THICKNESS, IN

e S
_ l aa
o M *03> §
<U )

> 3 13
JS XS
H ■“

z 5?►
o *
■5 ^
LU > a
O S
0 .3
< 13
«w U
a
eZ a)
® H
•S S
1
a i*r,
S <*
® IS
u S
00
Z
a>
h
.1
N -48 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -5 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J R C P (JA C -3 2 -1 2 .4 7 )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 424,000

B A C K C A L C U L A T IO N O F AND Ec
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D« D j2 d 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F l^dyn SLAB Ec
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
10,565 4 76 4 40 3 77 3 18 30 61 36 66 204 8 4 E + 06
10,376 5 27 4 88 4 21 3 54 30 73 37 31 175 7 7 E + 06
10,328 5 47 5 11 4 33 3 58 30 64 36 82 172 7 2 E + 06
10,249 4 52 4 17 3 62 3 03 30 70 37 18 202 8 9 E + 06
188 8 I E + 06
D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LO S C„ >
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
94 4 2 700 4 2 2 5 8 1E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 00

T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs ***SeIected by engineer
(in) (m illio n s)
6 10 50 0 459,546
6 90 80 0 84 422,939
7 40 90 1 282 425,110
7 90 95 1 645 453,572
8 70 99 2 327 448,616

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T F jc = 0 98 (10 F A I L U R E S / M I U N R E P A I R E D )
I N P U T F fa, = 0 96 (50 M I D - S L A B W O R K I N G C R A C K S )
I N P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = F jC * F dur * F fat * D exist = 7 53

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BO L P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 0 00 2 46 0 00
80 0 00 2 32 0 00
90 0 00 2 24 0 00
95 0 37 2 17 0 81
99 1 17 2 06 2 41
Appendix N N -49

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -9 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J R C P (1-30)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 17,668,158 (20 Y E A R S )

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D„ D ]2 D 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K dyj) SLAB ]
dbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LO S cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
53 3 2 710 4 5 2 5 5 I E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 01
*** *** ***
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (m illio n s) ***Selected by engr
9 30 50 0 17,483,863
10 40 80 0 84 17,272,377
11 10 90 1 282 18,026,295
11 60 95 1 645 17,540,132
12 70 99 2 327 17,638,108

D E T E R M I N E D eff
IN P U T F jc = 1 00
IN P U T F to = 0 975
I N P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = Fjc * F dur * F fat * D exist = 9 75

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 0 00 2 29 0 00
80 0 65 2 13 1 38
90 1 35 2 03 2 75
95 1 85 1 97 3 65
99 2 95 1 86 5 48
N-50 Design o f Pavement Structures

R EV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -1 0 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J R C P (1-30)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 12,801,929 (15 years)

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D0 D i2 D 24 d 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K dyn SLAB I
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR

D E T E R M IN E Df
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LO S cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
53 32 710 4 5 2 5 5 I E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 01
*** *** ***
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R z ESALs
(in) (m illio n s) ***Selected by engr
8 90 50 0 13,112,728
9 90 80 0.84 12,426,728
10 60 90 1 282 13,210,489
11 10 95 1 645 13,011,773
12 10 99 2 327 12,670,888
D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T F jc = 1 00
I N P U T F fat = 0 975
I N P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = F jc * F dur * F fat * D exis, = 9 75

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 0 00 2 36 0 00
80 0 15 2 20 0 33
90 0 85 2 10 1 79
95 1 35 2 03 2 75
99 2 35 1 92 4 51
Appendix N N-51

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -1 1 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J P C P (3005, S T N 353)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 8 20 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 11,000,000

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D0 D 12 D 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K clyn SLAB Ec
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
8,952 6 31 5 31 4 36 3 43 27 65 26 04 256 2 5 E + 06
256 2 5 E + 06

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry trial D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LO S cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
128 4 0 650 4 5 2 5 3 0 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
*** ***
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (m illio n s) ***Selected by engr
9 70 50 0 11,009,829
10 80 80 0 84 11,071,373
11 40 90 1 282 11,005,188
12 00 95 1 645 11,474,284
13 00 99 2 327 11,211,036

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T FjC = 1 0 0 (R E P L A C E A L L S L A B S W IT H C R A C K S )
I N P U T F fat = 0 95
IN P U T F dur = 1 0 0
D eff (in) = Fjc * F dur * Ffat * Dexist = 7 79

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 1 91 1 97 3 76
80 3 01 1 85 5 57
90 3 61 1 80 6 49
95 4 21 1 75 7 38
99 5 21 1 69 8 82
JV-52 Design of Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S W -1 2 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J P C P (7456)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 8 20 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 11,000,000

\ C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D0 D f2 d 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F E dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
8,496 3 68 3 08 2 64 2.23 28 29 27 76 367 4 6 E + 06
367 4 6 E + 06

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s. LO S C„
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
184 4 0 689 4 5 25 4 6 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (m illio ns)
9 40 50 0 10,780,339
10 50 80 0 84 11,039,263
11 10 90 1 282 11,072,656
11 60 95 1 645 11,006,869
12 60 99 2 327 10,932,237

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T F jC = 1 00 ( R E P A IR A L L D E T E R I O R A T E D A R E A S )
IN P U T F fat = 0 95
IN P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = F jc * F dur * F fat * D exist = 7 79

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 1 61 2 00 3 22
80 2 71 1 88 5 10
90 3 31 1 82 6 04
95 3 81 1 78 6 79
99 4 81 1 71 8 25
Appendix N N-53

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-13 AC AND BONDED PC C O L O F EX ISTIN G JP C P (3005, STN 305)
E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 8 20 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 11,000,000

\ C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D0 D 12 d 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K<h n SLAB E c
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,144 3 89 3 37 2 85 2 40 28 89 29 62 329 5 4 E + 06
329 5 4 E + 06

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry trial D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LO S Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
165 4 0 723 4 5 2 5 5 4 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (m illio n s)
9 30 50 0 10,980,171
10 40 80 0 84 11,405,797
11 00 90 1 282 11,517,791
11 50 95 1 645 11,508,298
12 50 99 2 327 11,534,896

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T F jc = 1 00 (R E P A IR A L L D E T E R I O R A T E D A R E A S )
I N P U T F fat = 0 95
I N P U T F dur = 1 00
Deff (in) = Fjc * F dur * F fat * D exist = 1 1 9

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 1 51 2 01 3 04
80 2 61 1 89 4 93
90 3 21 1 83 5 88
95 3 71 1 79 6 64
99 4 71 1 72 8 10
A’-54 Design of Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

S E -1 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J P C P (1-10)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 9 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 25,500,000 (20 Y E A R S )

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D0 D i2 D 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K,iyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,016 1 73 1 45 1 26 0 94 28 06 27 11 867 7 5 E + 06
9,499 1 61 1 46 1 30 0 98 30.22 34 81 600 1 4 E + 07
9,177 1 61 1 34 1 26 0 94 28 88 29 60 798 9 9 E + 06
9,338 1 93 1 57 1 26 1 14 27 14 24 80 959 5 8E + 06
806 9 3 E + 06

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry trial D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec So LO S Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
403 4 0 895 4 5 2 5 9 3 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (m illio n s)
9 30 50 0 25,372,489
10 40 80 0 84 26,051,167
10 90 90 1 282 24,673,324
11 40 95 1 645 24,609,486
12 50 99 2 327 25,928,583

D E T E R M I N E D eff
IN P U T FjC = 0 9 6
IN P U T F fat = 0 9 9
IN P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = FjC * F dur * F fat * D exist = 8 55

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 0 75 2 11 1 58
80 1 85 1 97 3 64
90 2 35 1 92 4 50
95 2 85 1 87 5 31
99 3 95 1 77 6 99
Appendix N N-55

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -6 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J R C P (1-80)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 22,834,400 (20 Y E A R S )

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D0 D f2 D 24 d 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K d}[i SLAB ]
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K ef, J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LO S cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
155 3 2 640 4 2 2 5 4 2 E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 00
*** *** ***
T R IA L COM PUTED
D, R Z ESALs
(in) (m illio n s) ***Selected by engr
10 00 50 0 22,173,569
11 30 80 0 84 22,868,477
12 00 90 1 282 22,800,733
12 60 95 1 645 22,700,972
13 80 99 2 327 22,528,954

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T Fjc = 0 95
I N P U T F fat = 0 95
I N P U T F dur = 0 88
D eff (in) = Fjc * F dur * F fat * D exis, = 7 94

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 2 06 1 95 4 01
80 3 36 1 82 6 11
90 4 06 1 76 7 16
95 4 66 1 72 8 03
99 5 86 1 66 9 75
M-56 Design of Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -7 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J R C P (1-57)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 10,000,000 (10 Y E A R S )

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LOAD Do D i2 D 24 D 36 AREA R E L S T IF F Kflyn SLA B E c
(lbs) (m ils) (mils) (m ils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
11,144 4 39 3 97 3 49 3.01 30 51 36 16 239 4 8E + 06
10,864 4 90 4 57 4 18 3 70 31 96 45 36 133 6 6E + 06
10,928 4 51 4 09 3 69 3 14 30 88 38 12 206 5 I E + 06
10,824 4 55 4 17 3 77 3 30 31 29 40 58 179 5 7 E + 06
189 5 6E+ 06

D E T E R M IN E D f
Vary trial D f until computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
Keff J Sc Pt P2 Ec So LO S Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
95 3 5 730 4 5 2 5 5 6 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (m illions)
8 70 50 0 9,973,718
9 70 80 0 84 10,214,587
10 30 90 1 282 10,619,093
10 80 95 1 645 10,851,107
11 60 99 2 327 10,095,415

D E T E R M I N E D eff
IN P U T Fjc = 0 97 (10 F A IL U R E S /M I U N R E P A IR E D )
IN P U T F fat = 0 95 (50 M I D -S L A B W O R K IN G C R A C K S )
IN P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = F jc * F dur * Ffct * D exist = 9 22

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC O L
LEVEL T H IC K FACTOR T H IC K
50 0 00 2 30 0 00
80 0 48 2 15 1 04
90 1 09 2 07 2 24
95 1 59 2 01 3 18
99 2 39 1 91 4 56
Appendix N N-57

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N W -7 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O V E R L A Y O F E X I S T I N G J R C P (N . A lb a n y -N . Jefferson )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 80,000,000 (20 years)

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D0 D 12 D 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 5 20 4 50 3 50 2 90 27 81 26 44 302 3 4 E + 06

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s„ LO S Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
151 2 2 636 4 5 2 5 3 4 E + 06 0 30 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (m illio n s)
9 70 50 0 80,032,494
10 63 80 0 84 79,968,401
11 15 90 1 282 80,157,839
11 59 95 1 645 80,149,803
12 45 99 2 327 79,857,251

D E T E R M I N E D eff
IN P U T F jc = 0 95
IN P U T F fat = 0 95
IN P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = F jC * F dur * F fat * D exist = 7 22

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 2 48 1 90 4 72
80 3 41 1 82 6 19
90 3 93 1 77 6 97
95 4 37 1 74 7 61
99 5 23 1 69 8 85
TV-58 Design of Pavement Structures

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N W -8 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O V E R L A Y O F E X IS T IN G J R C P

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 20,000,000 (TO P S I = 3 5)

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D« D 12 Dj4 d 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 5 20 4 50 3 50 2 90 27 81 26 44 302 3 4 E + 06

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pf Pz Ec So LO S cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
151 2 2 636 4 5 3 5 3 4 E + 06 0 30 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
8 79 50 0 20,070,512
9 68 80 0 84 19,978,527
10 17 90 1 282 20,004,306
10 58 95 1 645 19,965,651
11 40 99 2 327 20,094,732

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T F jC = 1 00
I N P U T F fat = 0 95
I N P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = Fjc * F dur * F fat * D exist = 7 60

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 1 19 2 05 2 45
80 2 08 1 95 4 05
90 2 57 1 89 4 87
95 2 98 1 85 5 53
99 3 80 1 78 6 78
Appendix N N-59

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

NE-6 AC AND BONDED PCC O L O F EX ISTIN G JR C P (ROUTE 9, 60-135)
E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 9 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 12,255,000 (20 Y E A R S , R IG ID E S A L S )

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD Dq D 12 D 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K (ly n SLAB E c
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LO S c d
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
129 3 5 749 4 5 2 5 6 0 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
D, R Z ESALs S U B G R A D E T IL L A N D /O R
(in) (m illio n s) A R T IF IC IA L F IL L ,
8 80 50 0 12,461,306 GO O D M A T E R IA L
9 80 80 0 84 12,611,798 K -V A L U E , M r , E A SSU M ED
10 30 90 1 282 12,228,971 S A M E A S N E -7 M E A S U R E D
10 80 95 1 645 12,466,916
11 70 99 2 327 12,241,576

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T Fjc = 100 ( R E P A I R D E T E R I O R A T E D J T S / C R A C K S )
I N P U T F fat = 0 97
I N P U T F dur = 1 00
D eff (in) = F jc * F dur* F fa, * D exist = 8 73__________

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 0 07 2 21 0 15
80 1 07 2 07 2 22
90 1 57 2 01 3 15
95 2 07 1 95 4 03
99 2 97 1 86 5 51
N -60 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N E -7 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J R C P ( R O U T E 2, S H R P 094020)

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 9 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 16,000,000 (20 Y E A R S , R IG ID E S A L S )

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD Do d ,2 D 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K dvn SLAB E c
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,504 3 74 3 39 2 84 2 35 29 76 32 80 290 5 4 E + 06
9,400 3 79 3 47 2 93 2 40 30 06 34 09 263 5 7 E + 06
9,648 3 99 3 72 3 19 2 65 30 77 37 51 212 6 8E + 06
12,848 5 02 4 59 3 89 3 25 30 16 34 50 265 6 0 E + 06
258 6 0 E + 06

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry trial D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s. LO S Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
129 3 5 749 4 5 2 5 6 0 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (m illio n s)
8 70 50 0 11,580,501
9 70 80 0 84 11,784,838
10 30 90 1 282 12,212,641
10 80 95 1 645 12,450,060
11 60 99 2 327 11,544,556

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T F jc = 100 (R E P A IR D E T E R I O R A T E D JT S /C K S )
I N P U T F ft, = 0 99
I N P U T F dur = 100
D eff (in) = FjC *F dur *F fat * D exist = 8 91

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BO L P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 0 00 2 26 0 00
80 0 79 2 11 1 67
90 1 39 2 03 2 82
95 1 89 1 97 3 72
99 2 69 1 88 5 06
Appendix N N-61

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

NE-8 AC AND BONDED PCC O L O F EX ISTIN G JR C P (SR119-408, INDIANA COUNTY)
E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 9 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 4,650,000 (R IG ID E S A L s , 10 Y E A R S )

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD Do D j2 D 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K (ly n SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR

D E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry trial D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LO S Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
150 3 2 650 4 2 3 0 4 0 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs C B R = 5 (S U B G R A D E )
(in) (millions) K - V A L U E E S T = 150 P SI/IN
8 10 50 0 4,735,838
9 10 80 0 84 4,735,538
9 60 90 1 282 4,604,577
10 10 95 1 645 4,720,641
11 00 99 2 327 4,698,339

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T F jC = 0 95
I N P U T F fat = 0 98
I N P U T F dur = 0 98
D eff (in) = F jC * F dur * F fat * D exist = 8 21

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BO L P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 0 00 2 24 0 00
80 0 89 2 09 1 86
90 1 39 2 03 2 82
95 1 89 1 97 3 72
99 2 79 1 87 5 22
N-62 Design o f Pavement Structures

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

N E -9 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G J R C P (1-80, C O L U M B I A C O U N T Y )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane E S A L s = 10,050,000 (R IG ID E S A L s , 10 Y E A R S )

B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LO AD D« D j2 D 24 D 36 AREA R E LS T IF F K d yn SLAB Ec
(lbs) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (m ils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR

E T E R M IN E D f
V a ry tria l D f u n til computed E S A L s equal future design E S A L s
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pf P2 Ec So LO S cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
150 3 2 650 4 2 3 0 4 0 E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs C B R = 5 (S U B G R A D E )
(in) (m illio n s) K - V A L U E E S T = 150 P SI/IN
9 30 50 0 10,643,283
10 30 80 0 84 10,215,852
10 90 90 1 282 10,283,303
11 40 95 1 645 10,258,834
12 40 99 2 327 10,267,810

D E T E R M I N E D eff
I N P U T FjC = 0 95
IN P U T F fat = 0 98
I N P U T F dur = 0 98
D eff (in) = F jC * F dur * Ffat * D exist = 9 12

D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FACTO R T H IC K
50 0 18 2 20 0 39
80 1 18 2 06 2 42
90 1 78 1 98 3 52
95 2 28 1 93 4 38
99 3 28 1 83 5 99
Appendix N N-63

N 6.0 AC OVERLAY AND BONDED PCC OVERLAY OF CRCP

Bonded
AC Overlay PCC Overlay
Region- Existing Design Design Thickness Thickness
Project Pavement ESALs Reliability (in) (in)
M W -8 CRCP 10,000,000 50 0 8 0 4
(10 years) 80 2 4 12
90 3 4 17
95 4 1 2 1
99* 5 2 2 8

State design procedure indicates 6 2-inch A C overlay is needed State policy design is 3 25-
inch A C overlay

M W -9 CRCP 18,000,000 50 2 1 10
(10 years) 80 3 9 2 0
90 4 8 25
95 5 4 29
99* 6 6 37

Pavement has medium- to high-severity “ D ” cracking State design procedure indicates

6 3-inch A C overlay is needed State policy design is 3 25-inch A C overlay

M W -1 0 CRCP 20,000,000 50 0 9 0 4
(10 years) 80 2 7 1 3
90 3 6 1 8
95 4 3 2 2
99* 5 7 3 1

State design procedure indicates 6 5-inch A C overlay is needed State policy design is 3 25-
inch A C overlay

M W - 11 CRCP 11,000,000 50 06 0 3
(10 years) 80 2 4 12
90 3 3 17
95 4 0 2 1
99* 5 2 2 8

State design procedure indicates 6 25-inch A C overlay is needed State policy design is
3 25-inch A C overlay
N -64 Design o f Pavement Structures

Bonded
AC Overlay PCC Overlay
Region- Existing Design Design Thickness Thickness
Project Pavement ESALs Reliability (in) (in)
M W -1 2 CRCP 21,966,725 50 2 4 12
(20 years) 80 4 3 22
90 5 3 2 9
95 6 1 34
99* 7 6 4 4

N o deflection data are available State design procedure indicates a 6 -inch bonded P C C
overlay is needed

M W - 13 CRCP 23,305,980 50 2 8 1 4
(20 years) 80 4 7 2 5
90 5 7 3 1
95 65 3 6
99* 7 9 4 6

N o deflection data are available State design procedure indicates a 5-inch bonded P C C
overlay is needed

M W - 14 CRCP 14,066,735 50 1 9 0 9
(20 years) 80 3 8 1 9
90 4 8 2 5
95 5 6 3 0
99* 69 3 9

N o deflection data are available State design procedure indicates a 5-inch bonded P C C
overlay is needed

SE-2 CRCP 57,000,000 50* 3 6 18

(20 years) 80* 5 3 2 8
90 62 3 4
95 7 0 3 9
99 84 4 9

Extrem ely high traffic, very soft subgrade (k = 66 psi/inch) State constructed 4 5-inch
A C overlay

SW -14 CRCP 15,405,600 50 0 0

(15 years) 80 0 9 04
90 2 1 10
95 3 0 15
99 4 6 2 4
99 9 6 5 3 6

No design recommendation available for 15-year design period

Appendix N N-65

Bonded
A C O ve rla y P C C O verlay
R egion- E x is tin g Design Design T h ickn ess Th ickn ess
P ro je ct Pavem ent ESALs R e lia b ility (in) (in)

SW -15 CRCP 21,726,600 50 0 0

(20 years) 80 19 0 9
90 3.0 15
95 3 9 20
99 5 6 3 0
99 9* 7 5 4 3

State constructed 4-inch bonded P C C overlay for a 20-year design period

SW -16 CRCP 35,585,400 50 1 1 0 5

(30 years) 80 3 2 16
90 4 3 2 3
95 5 2 2 8
99 69 3 9
99 9 88 5 2

N o design recommendation available for 30-year design period

N -66 Design o f Pavement Structures

Sum m ary of Results for AC and Bonded PCC Overlay of CRCP

1 O verall, it appears that the revised A A S H T O overlay design procedures produce

reasonable A C overlay and bonded P C C overlay thicknesses for C R C P consistent with
State recommendations, provided different re lia b ility levels are used F or A C over­
lays, a re lia b ility level o f 95 percent produces agency recommendations For bonded
P C C overlays, a re liability o f 99 or greater produces agency recommendations Figure
N 9 shows the comparison between design overlay thickness and agency recommenda­
tions for these levels of re liab ility
2 A J factor in the range o f 2 2 to 2 6 is needed to produce a reasonable overlay
thickness for C R C P Each agency must determine an appropriate value for J, it
appears to vary from State to State
3 The examples illustrate the importance o f condition data and deflection data for
overlay design The condition factor F jC, which indicates the amount o f pavement
deterioration left unrepaired p rio r to overlay, has a significant effect on the overlay
thickness requirement Agencies w ill find that much greater overlay thicknesses are;
required to meet desired performance lives i f overlays are placed without adequate
preoverlay repair M ost agencies specified thorough repair for C R C P
4 The design re liability level is very significant M ost o f the projects were Interstate-
type highways A design re liab ility level o f 95 percent appears to be reasonable for A C
overlays Bonded P C C overlays appear to be designed at a 99-percent re lia b ility level
95-99% REL OL THICKNESS, IN
Appendix N

X
o

>
z

z
1 -

o
_J

LU
o
LU
CO
CO

Figure N9. Comparison of AC Overlay Thickness (at 95-percent reliability) and PCC Bonded Overlay Thickness
(at 99-percent reliability) vs that Recommended by Agencies
N-67
N-68 Design of Pavement Structures

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -8 AC AND BONDED PCC OVERLAY O F EXISTING C R C P (1-57)
E X ISTIN G PA VEM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 7 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 10,000,000 (5% ESAL GROWTH RATE, 10 YEARS)
BA CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F K efr AND E c
INPUT IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D« d 12 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K d yn SLAB E c
dbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 6 79 5 96 4 98 4 00 28 87 29 55 186 4 9E + 06
9,000 6 01 5 46 4 61 3 82 29 92 33 47 165 7 IE 4-06
9,000 6 27 5 44 4 42 3 43 28 15 27 38 234 4 5E + 06
9,000 7 13 6 94 5 79 4 18 30 94 38 48 105 7 9E + 06
173 6 I E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial D f until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
86 2 2 753 4 5 2 8 6 I E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
6 90 50 0 10,695,830
7 70 80 0 84 10,204,702
8 20 90 1 282 10,470,333
8 60 95 1 645 10,512,776
9 30 99 2 327 9,997,773
D ETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY AND BONDED PCC OVERLAY)
INPUT Fjc = 0 97
INPUT F fat = 0 96
INPUT Fdur = 1 00
Deff (in) = Fjc * Fdur * Ffat * Dexist = 6 52
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKNESS
R EL IA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FACTOR TH IC K
50 0 38 2 17 0 83
80 1 18 2 06 2 43
90 1 68 1 99 3 35
95 2 08 1 95 4 05
99 2 78 1 87 5 21
Appendix N N-69

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -9 AC AND BONDED PCC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G C R C P (1-80)
E X ISTIN G PA VEM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TRAFFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 18,000,000 (5% ESAL GROWTH RATE, 10 YEARS)
B A C KCALCULATIO N O F Keff AND Ec
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 Di2 D24 d 36 AREA R E L S T IF F K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 4 05 3 60 3 04 2 48 29 35 31 22 280 6 1E + 06
9,000 4 16 3 49 2 7 1 91 26 61 23 63 471 3 4E + 06
9,000 3 49 3 04 2 59 2 14 29 04 30 12 349 6 6E + 06
9,000 5 29 4 84 4 16 3 38 30 25 34 93 172 5 9E + 06
318 5 5E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J S£ P i P2 Ec S„ LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
159 2 2 727 4 5 2 8 5 5E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
7 40 50 0 17,743,150
8 40 80 0 84 18,815,526
8 90 90 1 282 18,776,535
9 30 95 1 645 18,436,227
10 10 99 2 327 17,988,918
DETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY)
INPUT FjC 0 96
INPUT F fat 0 98
INPUT F dur 0 85 (“ D ” CRACKING)
D e, (in) F jc * F dur * F fat *^ Dpxkt
1-7exisi = 6 40
DETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R EL IA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FACTOR TH IC K
50 1 00 2 08 2 08
80 2 00 1 96 3 92
90 2 50 1 90 4 76
95 2 90 1 86 5 40
99 3 70 1 79 6 63
N-70 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

MW-IO AC AND BONDED PCC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G C R C P (1-80)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FU TU RE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 20,000,000 (5% ESAL GROWTH RATE, 10 YEARS)
B A C K CALCULATIO N O F K eff AND E c
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD Do D i2 d 24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 4 39 3 94 3 26 2 70 29 37 31 30 257 5 7E + 06
9,000 4 73 4 27 36 2 93 29 68 32 50 222 5 7E+06
9,000 4 95 4 39 3 71 3 04 29 32 31 12 231 5 0E + 06
9,000 5 18 4 73 4 05 3 26 30 12 34 32 182 5 8E+06
223 5 5E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s„ LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
129 2 2 728 4 5 2 8 5 5E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
7 70 50 0 20,808,480
8 60 80 0 84 20,492,475
9 10 90 1 282 20,429,537
9 50 95 1 645 20,032,921
10 40 99 2 327 20,748,051
D ETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY)
INPUT FjC = 1 00
INPUT Ffat = 0 91
INPUT F dur = 1 00
Deff (in) = Fjc * Fdur * Ffat * Dexist = 7 28
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R EL IA B IL ITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
L EV EL TH IC K FACTOR TH IC K
50 0 42 2 16 0 91
80 1 32 2 04 2 69
90 1 82 1 98 3 60
95 2 22 1 93 4 29
99 3 12 1 84 5 74
Appendix N N-71

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -11 AC AND BONDED PCC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G C R C P (1-57)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 7 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 11,000,000 (5% ESAL GROWTH RATE, 10 YEARS)
BA CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F K eff AND E c
INPUT IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 d 12 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF Edyn SLAB Ec
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 5 15 4 60 3 89 3 09 29 38 31 34 219 7 2E + 06
9,000 5 05 4 42 3 59 2 72 28 27 27 70 284 5 7E + 06
9,000 4 92 4 48 3 88 3 08 30 15 34 46 190 9 2E + 06
9,000 6 24 5 28 4 29 3 42 27 69 26 14 258 4 1E + 06
9,000 4 63 4 12 3 44 2 73 29 13 30 44 257 7 6E + 06
242 6 8E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K e ff J Sc P i P2 Ec s„ LOS
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
121 2 2 782 4 5 2 8 6 8E + 06 0 35 0 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
6 70 50 0 11,129,126
7 60 80 0 84 11,449,870
8 10 90 1 282 11,725,647
8 50 95 1 645 11,762,312
9 20 99 2 327 11,178,438
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjc = 1 00 (REPAIR ALL FAILURES)
INPUT F fat = 0 97
INPUT Fdur = 0 95 (“ D ” CRACKING)
Deff (in) = FjC * Fdur * Ffat * Dexist = 6 45
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R EL IA B ILITY PC C BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FACTOR TH IC K
50 0 25 2 19 0 55
80 1 15 2 06 2 37
90 1 65 2 00 3 29
95 2 05 1 95 4 00
99 2 75 1 88 5 16
N-72 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -12 AC AND BONDED PCC OL O F EX ISTIN G C R C P (1-80)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 21,966,725
B A C K CALCULATIO N O F K eff AND E c (ROAD R A TER DEVICE)
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 D 12 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K dvn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
2,000 1 50 1 30 1 30 1 10 31.20 40 01 103 6 0E + 06
2,000 3 20 2 90 2 63 2 20 30 86 38 04 53 2 6E + 06
2,000 1 40 1 30 1 10 1 00 30 86 38 01 122 5 8E + 06
2,000 1 20 1 10 1 00 0 90 31 50 41 95 117 8 3E + 06
99 5 7E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
Keff J Sc Pi Pi Ec s„ LOS cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
49 2 5 736 4 2 2 5 5 7E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
8 60 50 0 22,076,633
9 70 80 0 84 22,747,903
10 30 90 1 282 22,842,426
10 80 95 1 645 22,682,553
11 80 99 2 327 22,428,121
D ETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY)
INPUT FjC = 0 95
INPUT Ffat = 0 98
INPUT Fdur = 1 00
Deff (in) = Fjc * F dur * F fat * Dexist = 7 45
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R E LIA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
L EV EL TH IC K FACTOR T H IC K
50 1 15 2 06 2 37
80 2 25 1 93 4 34
90 2 85 1 87 5 32
95 3 35 1 82 6 10
99 4 35 1 74 7 59
Appendix N N-73

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -1 3 A C A N D B O N D E D P C C O L O F E X I S T I N G C R C P (1 -2 8 0 )

E X IS T IN G P A V E M E N T D E S IG N A N D F U T U R E T R A F F IC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 23,305,980
B A C K C A L C U L A T I O N O F K eff A N D E c (R O A D R A T E R D E V I C E )
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T R A D IU S
LOAD D0 D 12 D 24 D 36 AREA R E L S T IF F K(lvn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
2,000 1 60 1 50 1 40 1 20 32 25 47 84 68 8 I E + 06
2,000 I 40 1 20 1 10 0 90 29 57 32 06 171 4 1E + 06
2,000 1 20 1 10 1 00 0 90 31 50 41 95 117 8 3E+06
2,000 2 30 2 00 1 70 1 30 28 70 28 99 127 2 I E + 06
121 5 7E + 06
D E T E R M IN E D f
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s„ LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
60 2 5 735 4 2 2 5 5 7E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
8 60 50 0 2 2 ,9 4 5 ,5 1 0
9 70 80 0 84 2 3 ,5 3 0 ,9 3 0
10 30 90 1 282 2 3 ,5 7 8 ,0 1 2
10 80 95 1 645 2 3 ,3 7 5 ,5 3 9
11 80 99 2 327 2 3 ,0 4 9 ,0 8 4

D E T E R M I N E D eff ( C O N V E N T I O N A L A C O V E R L A Y )
INPUT Fjc - 0 95
INPUT F fat = 0 95
INPUT Fdur = 1 00
Deff (in) = Fjc * Fdur * F fat * Dexist = 7 22
D E T E R M IN E O V E R L A Y T H IC K N E S S
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL P C C to A C AC OL
LEVEL T H IC K FA CTO R T H IC K
50 1 38 2 03 2 80
80 2 48 1 90 4 72
90 3 08 1 84 5 68
95 3 58 1 80 6 45
99 4 58 1 73 7 92
N-74 Design o f Pavement Structures

R EV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -14 AC AND BONDED PCC O L O F EXISTING C R C P (1-35)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 14,056,735
BA CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F K etf AND E c (ROAD R A TER DEVICE)
IN PU T IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 Dj2 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
2,000 2 40 2 00 1 60 1 20 27 00 24 48 169 1 4E + 06
2,000 1 70 1 50 1 30 1 00 29 29 31 02 150 3 2E + 06
2,000 2 00 1 90 1 80 1 50 32 70 52 34 45 7 8E+06
2,000 1 60 1 50 1 40 1 10 31 88 44 69 78 7 1E + 06
111 4 9E + 06

D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
Keff J Sc Pi Pz Ec s„ LOS C„
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
55 2 5 700 4 2 2 5 4 9E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
8 20 50 0 14,644,036
9 20 80 0 84 14,308,405
9 80 90 1 282 14,559,817
10 30 95 1 645 14,614,977
11 20 99 2 327 13,887,627
D ETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY)
INPUT FjC = 0 95
INPUT F fat = 0 96
INPUT Fdur = 1 00
Deff (in) = Fjc * Fdur * F fat * Dexjst = 7 30
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKNESS
R E LIA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FA C TO R T H IC K
50 0 90 2 09 1 89
80 1 90 1 97 3 75
90 2 50 1 90 4 76
95 3 00 1 85 5 56
99 3 90 1 78 6 93
Appendix N N-75

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SE-2 AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G C R C P (1-85)_________
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 57,000,000 (20 YEARS)
BA CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F K eff AND E c
INPUT IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 D j2 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K d y ri SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,502 8 08 7 19 5 94 4 67 28 97 29 88 162 3 0E + 06
9,621 7 05 6 54 5 56 4 39 30 33 35 32 135 4 8E + 06
9,463 5 56 5 17 4 5 3 64 30 80 37 68 148 6 8E + 06
9,415 6 63 6 35 5 61 4 77 31 96 45 39 85 8 3E + 06
132 5 7E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s„ LOS C„
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
66 2 2 737 4 5 30 5 7E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
9 50 50 0 57,706,327
10 50 80 0 84 56,656,066
11 10 90 1 282 57,588,463
11 60 95 1 645 57,839,217
12 60 99 2 327 58,521,832
D ETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY)
INPUT FjC = 0 99
INPUT Ffat = 0 97
INPUT Fdur = 1 00
Deff (in) = Fic * F rilir * Ffa, * De*ia, = 7 68
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R E LIA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FACTOR TH IC K
50 1 82 1 98 3 59
80 2 82 1 87 5 27
90 3 42 1 81 6 20
95 3 92 1 77 6 95
99 4 92 1 71 8 40
N-76 Design o f Pavement Structures

R EV ISED C H A PTER S AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-14 PC C BONDED AND AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G C R C P (1-610)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 15,405,600 (15 YEARS)
BA CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F Keft AND Ec
INPUT IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 Di2 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 ERR ERR ERR ERR
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT IN PU T INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LOS cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
371 2 4 700 4 5 2 5 4 9E + 06 0 39 0 00 0 97
*** *** ***
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs ***Selected by Engr
(in) (millions)
7 10 50 0 15,478,190
8 20 80 0 84 15,781,542
8 80 90 1 282 15,935,304
9 30 95 1 645 15,948,597
10 20 99 2 327 15,145,957
11 40 99 9 3 09 15,279,993
D ETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY)
INPUT FjC = 1 000
INPUT F fat = 0 975
INPUT Fdur = 1 000
Deff (in) = Fjc * Fdur * Ffat * Dexist = 7 80
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R E LIA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
L EV EL TH IC K FACTOR TH IC K
50 0 00 2 34 0 00
80 0 40 2 16 0 87
90 1 00 2 08 2 08
95 1 50 2 02 3 02
99 2 40 1 91 4 59
99 9 3 60 1 80 6 48
Appendix N N-77

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-15 PCC BONDED AND AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G C R C P (1-610)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TRAFFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 21,726,600 (20 YEARS)
B A C K CALCULATIO N O F Keff AND E c
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D 0 D i2 D24 D 36 AREA R E L S T IF F K dyn SLAB Ec
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 ERR ERR ERR ERR
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pf P2 Ec S„ LOS cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
371 2 4 700 4 5 2 5 4 9E + 06 0 39 0 00 0 97
*** *** ***
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs ***Selected by Engr
(in) (millions)
7 60 50 0 22,101,395
8 70 80 0 84 22,152,028
9 30 90 1 282 22,094,923
9 80 95 1 645 21,874,239
10 80 99 2 327 21,588,322
12 10 99 9 3 09 22,310,661
DETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY)
INPUT Fjc = 1 000
INPUT F fat = 0 975
INPUT Fdur = 1 000
Deff (in) = Fjc * Fdur * F fat * Dexist = 7 80
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R EL IA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC O L
L EV EL T H IC K FA C TO R TH IC K
50 0 00 2 25 0 00
80 0 90 2 09 1 88
90 1 50 2 02 3 02
95 2 00 1 96 3 91
99 3 00 1 85 5 56
99 9 4 30 1 75 7 51
N-78 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-16 PC C BONDED AND AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G C R C P (1-610)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 35,585,400 (30 YEARS)
B A C K C A LC U LA TIO N O F Keff AND Ec
IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT IN PU T RADIUS
LOAD D0 Dn d 24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 .0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec So LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
371 2 4 700 4 5 2 5 4 9E + 06 0 39 0 00 0 97
*** *** ***
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
8 30 50 0 35,968,459
9 40 80 0 84 35,003,036
10 05 90 1 282 35,344,543
10 60 95 1 645 35,450,661
11 70 99 2 327 35,737,516
13 00 99 9 3 09 35,373,827
D ETER M IN E Deff (CONVENTIONAL AC OVERLAY)
INPUT FjC = 1 000
INPUT F fat = 0 97
INPUT Fdur = 1 000
Deff (in) = Fjc * Fdur * Ffat * Dexist = 7 80
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R E L IA B IL IT Y PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FA C TO R TH IC K
50 0 50 2 15 1 07
80 1 60 2 00 3 21
90 2 25 1 93 4 34
95 2 80 1 87 5.24
99 3 90 1 78 6 93
99 9 5 20 1 69 8 81
Appendix N N-79

N7.0 AC OVERLAY O F AC/PCC PAVEMENT

AC Overlay
Region- Existing Design Design Thickness
Project Pavement ESALs i Reliability (in)
SE-3 AC/JPCP 3,000,000 50 0
80 0 3
90 13
95* 22
99 37

State feels second AC overlay of about 2 5 inches is reasonable

SW-17 AC/JRCP 17,668,158 50 0

(20 years) 80 02
90 16
95 26
99* 4 6

Existing 3-inch AC overlay is poor quality State plans to mill off completely and replace
with 4-inch AC overlay for a 20-year design

SW-18 AC/JRCP 12,801,929 50 0

(15 years) 80 0
90 0 5
95 16
99 36

Existing 3-inch AC overlay is poor quality State plans to mill off completely and replace
with 4-inch AC overlay for a 20-year design

MW -15 AC/JRCP 10,000,000 50 0

(10 years) 80 10
90* 22
95 33
99 5 1

State plans to mill 0 5 inch AC from surface, AC patching, and place 2-inch AC overlay
This pavement has serious “ D ” cracking in the JRCP slab

MW-16 AC/CRCP 10,000,000 50 4 1

(10 years) 80* 5 7
90 6 5
95 7 2
99 8 5

Extensive severe “ D ” cracking and poor quality AC, and more than 80 deteriorated areas
per mile which will not be repaired with PCC State plans to mill off 0 75 inches and place 5-
inch second AC overlay
N-80 Design o f Pavement Structures

Sum m ary of Results for AC Overlay of AC/PCC Pavement

1 Overall, it appears that the revised AASHTO overlay design procedures produce
reasonable second AC overlay thicknesses that are consistent with State recommenda­
tions The reliability level required to match the State recommendations is variable,
however This is not too surprising since agencies have little performance experience
with second overlays
2 All of the condition factors have a significant effect on overlay thickness, indicating
that the amount of pavement deterioration left unrepaired prior to overlay, has a
significant effect on the overlay thickness requirement Some existing AC/PCC pave­
ments are very badly deteriorated due to PCC durability problems
3 The design reliability level is very significant A design reliability level of 90 to 95
percent appears to be reasonable for second AC overlays
Appendix N N-81

REV ISED C H A PTER S AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SE-3 AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G A C /JPC P PAVEM ENT SR-25
E X IST IN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FU TURE TR A FFIC
AC layer thickness 2 50 (in)
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 3,000,000
B A C KCALCULATIO N O F K eff AND E c
AC temp = 78 (deg F)
AC modulus = 533,638 (psi)
AC/PCC 1 (0 for bonded, 1 for unbonded)
IN PUT INPUT IN PU T INPUT INPUT AC PCC PCC RADIUS
LOAD Do D 12 D24 D36 AREA D0 AREA R E L S T IF F K{lyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,096 5 54 4 48 3 77 2 91 27 02 5 21 28 36 27.98 273 3 8E + 06
9,112 4 84 3 64 3 03 2 32 25 41 4 51 26 84 24 13 422 3 3E + 06
9,056 6 59 4 69 3 86 2 95 24 25 6 26 25 22 21 04 395 1 8E + 06
9,096 4 49 3 76 3 16 2 49 27 82 4 16 29 57 32 04 262 6 3E + 06
338 3 8E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s. LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
169 32 654 4 5 2 8 3 8E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
6 93 50 0 3,007,488
7 86 80 0 84 3,005,003
8 36 90 1 282 3,003,153
8 78 95 1 645 2,998,692
9 61 99 2 327 3,008,863
DETER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjc = 0 85
INPUT Fdur = 1 00
INPUT Fac = 0 94
Thickness o f AC to be milled = 0 50 (in)
Dac = Original Dac — milled Dac = 2 00 (in)
D eff = (Fjc*Pdur*Dexist) + (F ac*Dac/2 0) = 7 74 (in)
DETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R EL IA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
L EV EL TH IC K FA CTO R TH IC K
50 0 00 0 00 0 00
80 0 12 2 21 0 26
90 0 62 2 13 1 32
95 1 04 2 07 2 16
99 1 87 1 97 3.69
N-82 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-17 AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G A C /JR C P (1-30)
E X IST IN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FU TU RE TR A FFIC
AC layer thickness 3 00 (in)
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 17,668,158 (20 years)
BA CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F Keff AND E c
AC temp = 59 (deg F)
AC modulus = 1,067,303 (psi)
AC/PCC = 0 (0 for bonded, 1 for unbonded)
IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT AC PCC PCC RADIUS
LOAD Do Du d 24 D36 AREA D« AREA R ELSTIFF K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 2 99 2 60 2 23 1 86 29 12 2 90 29 85 33 16 348 4 9E + 06
348 4 9E + 06
D ET ER M IN E Df
Vary trial D f until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s„ LOS cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
174 3 2 703 4 5 2 5 4 9E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
8 96 50 0 17,683,315
10 10 80 0 84 17,687,324
10 74 90 1 282 17,681,982
11 29 95 1 645 17,662,473
12 39 99 2 327 17,640,735
D ETER M IN E Detf
INPUT FjC = 1 00
INPUT Fdur = 1 00
INPUT Fac = 0 80
Thickness of AC to be milled = 3 00 (in)
Dac = Original Dac — milled Dac = 0 00 (in)
Deff = (Fjc*Fdur*Dexist) + (Fac*Dac/2 0) = 10 00 (in)
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKNESS
R E L IA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FACTOR TH IC K
50 0 00 0 00 0 00
80 0 10 2 21 0 22
90 0 74 2 12 1 57
95 1 29 2 04 2 63
99 2 39 1 91 4 57
Appendix N N-83

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-18 AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G A C /JR C P (1-30)
E X IST IN G PA V EM EN T DESIG N AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
AC layer thickness 3 00 (in)
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 12,801,929 (20 years)
B A C KCALCULATIO N O F Keff AND E c
AC temp = 59 (deg F)
AC modulus = 1,067,303 (psi)
AC/PCC = 0 (0 for bonded, 1 for unbonded)
IN PU T IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT AC PCC PCC RADIUS
LOAD D0 D 12 D24 D36 AREA D0 AREA R E L S T IF F K dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 2 99 2 60 2 23 1 86 29 12 2 90 29 85 33 16 348 4 9E + 06
348 4 9E + 06
DETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT IN PU T INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s„ LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
174 3 2 703 4 5 2 5 4 9E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
8 50 50 0 12,792,393
9 60 80 0 84 12,803,172
10 22 90 1 282 12,839,528
10 75 95 1 645 12,840,425
11 80 99 2 327 12,787,792
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjc = 1 00
INPUT F dur = 1 00
INPUT Fac = 0 80
Thickness o f AC to be milled = 3 00 (in)
D ac = Original D ac — milled D a c = 0 00 (in)
D eff = (F jC* F dur* D exist) + ( F ac* D ac/2 0) = 10 00 (in)

D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS

R EL IA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FA CTO R TH IC K
50 0 00 0 00 0 00
80 0 00 0 00 0 00
90 0 22 2 19 0 48
95 0 75 2 11 1 59
99 1 80 1 98 3 56
N-84 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -15 AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G A C /JR C P (1-74)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
AC layer thickness 3 00 (in)
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 10,000,000 (20 years)
B A CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F K eft AND Ec
AC temp = (deg F)
AC modulus = 1,626,000 (psi) from lab tests of cores
AC/PCC = 0 (0 for bonded, 1 for unbonded)
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT AC PCC PCC RADIUS
LOAD D0 d 12 d 24 D36 AREA Do AREA R E L ST IFF Kdyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 5 19 3 99 3 40 2 79 26 31 5 14 26 49 23 39 389 1 4E + 06
9,000 3 82 3 20 2 85 2 38 28 74 3 77 29 02 30 06 324 3 I E + 06
9,000 4 05 3 50 3 09 2 65 29 45 4 00 29 72 32 65 259 3 5E + 06
9,000 3 84 3 19 2 80 2 41 28 48 3 79 28 76 29 19 341 2 9E + 06
328 2 7E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pf P2 Ec s„ LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
164 32 606 4 5 2 5 2 7E + 06 0 39 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
8 59 50 0 10,066,278
9 73 80 0 84 10,036,274
10 37 90 1 282 10,036,705
10 92 95 1 645 10,034,620
12 02 99 2 327 10,048,532
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT F jC = 0 9 0 (5 0 unrepaired areas/mile)
INPUT Fdur = 0 9 0 (localized failures from “ D ” cracking)
INPUT Fac = 0 9 5 (fair AC mixture)
Thickness of AC to be milled = 0 5 0 (in)
Dac = Original Dac — milled Dac = 2 5 0 (in)
Deff = (F jC* F dur* D exist) + ( F ac* D ac/2 0 ) = 9 2 9 (in)

D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKNESS

R EL IA B IL ITY PC C BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FACTOR T H IC K
50 0 00 0 00 0 00
80 0 44 2 16 0 95
90 1 08 2 07 2 24
95 1 63 2 00 3 26
99 2 73 1 88 5 13
Appendix N N-85

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -16 AC OVERLAY O F EX ISTIN G A C /JR C P (1-74)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
AC layer thickness 3 00 (in)
Slab thickness 7 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 10,000,000 (20 years)
B A C KCALCULATIO N O F K eff AND E c
AC temp = (deg F)
AC modulus = 1,700,000 (psi) from lab tests of cores
AC/PCC = 1 (0 for bonded, 1 for unbonded)
INPUT IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT AC PCC PCC RADIUS
LOAD D0 d 12 D 24 D36 AREA D« AREA R E L ST IFF SLAB Ec
K ( ly n
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 6 67 4 87 4 04 3 26 24 96 6 55 25 31 21 18 370 2 5E + 06
9,000 7 86 5 85 4 90 3 87 25 37 7 74 25 66 21 80 296 2 3E + 06
9,000 8 42 5 64 4 54 3 60 23 07 8 30 23 32 18 26 390 1 5E + 06
9,000 6 86 4 89 4 14 3 31 24 69 6 74 25 02 20 70 376 2 4E + 06
358 2 2E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s„ LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
179 2 6 583 45 2 5 2 2E + 06 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
7 55 50 0 10,027,995
8 54 80 0 84 10,049,317
9 08 90 1 282 10,055,760
9 53 95 1 645 10,004,655
10 44 99 2 327 10,056,223
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjc = 0 8 0
INPUT F dur = 0 8 0
INPUT F a c = 0 85
Thickness o f AC to be milled = 0 7 5 (in)
Dac = Original Dac — milled Dac = 2 2 5 (in)
D eff = (Fjc*Fdur*D exiSt) + ( F ac* D ac/2 0 ) = 5 4 4 (in)

DETER M IN E OVERLAY TH ICK N ESS

R E LIA B ILITY PCC BOL PCC to AC AC OL
LEV EL TH IC K FACTOR TH IC K
50 2 11 1 94 4 11
80 3 10 1 84 5 72
90 3 64 1 80 6 54
95 4 09 1 76 7 21
99 5 00 1 70 8 53
N-86 Design o f Pavement Structures

N 8.0 UNBONDED PCC OVERLAY O F JPCP, JRCP, AND C RC P

Unbonded
Overlay
Region- Overlay Existing Design Design Thickness
P roject Type Pavement ESALs Reliability (in)
SW-19 JPCP JPCP 11,000,000 50 5 4
80 7 1
90* 8 0
95 8 7
99 10 0

State design procedure indicates an 8-inch unbonded PCC overlay is needed

SW-20 JPCP JPCP 11,000,000 50 54

80 70
90* 79
95 85
99 10 0

State design procedure indicates an 8-inch unbonded PCC overlay is needed

SW-21 JPCP JPCP 11,000,000 50 5 7

80 7 3
90* 8 1
95 8 8
99 10 1

State design procedure indicates an 8-inch unbonded PCC overlay is needed

MW-17 JPCP JRCP 22,834,400 50 3 4

80 6 3
90 7 5
95 8 4
99 10 1

No recommendation available from agency

MW-18 JRCP CRCP 18,000,000 50 4 9

80 6 6
90 7 3
95 8 0
99 9 3

No recommendation available from agency

Appendix N N-87

Unbonded
Overlay
Region- Overlay Existing Design Design Thickness
P roject Type Pavement ESALs Reliability (in)
SE-4 JPCP CRCP 57,000,000 50 8 0
80 9 5
90 10 4
95 11 1
99 12 4

No recommendation available from agency Extremely high traffic loadings

SW-22 JPCP JRCP 17,668,158 50 0

80 4 5
90 5 9
95 6 8
99 8 5

No recommendation available from agency

SW-23 CRCP JRCP 17,668,158 50 0

80 3 6
90 5 3
95 6 3
99 8 1

No recommendation available from agency

MW-19 CRCP CRCP 18,000,000 50 4 9

80 6 6
90 7 3
95 8 0
99 9 3*

Agency recommends a 9-inch CRCP unbonded overlay

N-88 Design of Pavement Structures

Sum m ary of R esults for U nbonded PCC Overlays

1 Overall, it appears that the revised AASHTO overlay design procedures produce
reasonable unbonded PCC overlay thicknesses that are consistent with State recom­
mendations at a reliability level of 95 percent Figure N10 shows a plot of design
thickness vs agency recommendations for the few points available
2 The unbonded overlay thicknesses were obtained using the original Corps of Engi­
neers equations developed for airfields An improved design methodology can and
should be developed in the future to replace this empirical equation
3 The design reliability level is very significant Most of the projects were Interstate-
type highways A design reliability level of 95 to 99 percent appears to be reasonable
Appendix N N-89

1
*-

§
aO)
ai
VI
as
CO
CO
LU
z 2£Hu
*
0 I ’
tu
1 O .2
H U a
95 % REL OL THICKNESS, IN

—l ^a
o 35 *
O 4>
■o
& 2P B
K
Z ® s
LU § 8
Ju *£
69 4»»
a g
£
© '*to"1
r\
U >

au
a
WD
N-90 Design o f Pavement Structures

R EV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-19 UNBONDED JP C P OVERLAY O F JP C P (P roj. 3005, S tn. 305)
E X IST IN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 20 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 11,000,000
BA CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F K etf
IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD Do Di2 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K (jy n SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,144 3 89 3 37 2 85 2 40 28 89 29 62 329 5 4E + 06
9,088 3 89 3 33 2 81 2 31 28 50 28 40 355 4 9E + 06
9,104 3 94 3 33 2 81 2 36 28 29 27 78 366 4 6E + 06
9,128 3 94 3 42 2 85 2 40 28 75 29 17 334 5 I E + 06
346 5 0E + 06
D E TE R M IN E Df
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 700
Unbonded overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,900,000
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
173 4 0 700 4 5 2 5 4,900,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
9 40 50 0 10,972,879
10 50 80 0 84 11,282,235
11 10 90 1 282 11,337,203
11 60 95 1 645 11,285,326
12 60 99 2 327 11,235,624
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT F jCU = 0 94 (assume 100 deteriorated transverse cracks/mi)
Deff (in) = FjCU * Dexist = 7 71_________________________________
D ET ER M IN E OVERLAY THICKNESS
R EL IA B IL IT Y UBOL
L EV EL TH IC K
50 5 38
80 7 13
90 7 99
95 8 67
99 9 97
Appendix N N-91

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-20 UNBONDED JP C P OVERLAY O F JP C P (P roj. 7456)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TRAFFIC
Slab thickness 8 20 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 11,000,000
B A C K CALCULATIO N O F K eff
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 Di2 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K(jyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
8,496 3 68 3 08 2 64 2 23 28 29 27 76 367 4 6E + 06
8,456 3 60 2 99 2 56 2 14 28 07 27 14 390 4 5E + 06
8,520 3 64 3 12 2 64 2 23 28 66 28 90 343 5 I E + 06
8,472 3 64 3 08 2 60 2 19 28 34 27 90 366 4 7E + 06
367 4 7E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 700
Unbonded overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,900,000
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT IN PU T INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
183 4 0 700 4 5 2 5 4,900,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
9 40 50 0 11,172,267
10 40 80 0 84 10,781,303
11 00 90 1 282 10,854,402
11 50 95 1 645 10,821,104
12 60 99 2 327 11,388,209
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT F jCU = 0 94 (assume 100 deteriorated cracks/mi)
Deff (in) = F jcu * Dexist = 7 71
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R EL IA B ILITY UBOL
L EV EL T H IC K
50 5 38
80 6 98
90 7 85
95 8 53
99 9 97
N-92 Design of Pavement Structures

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-21 UNBONDED JP C P OVERLAY O F JP C P (P roj. 3005, S tn. 353)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 20 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 11,000,000
B A C K C A LC U LA TIO N O F Keff
IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD Do Du D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF l^dyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
8,952 6 31 5 31 4 36 3 43 27 65 26 04 256 2 5E + 06
8,904 6 35 5 31 44 3 47 27 63 25 98 254 2 5E + 06
8,936 6 27 5 23 4 32 3 43 27 56 25 81 261 2 5E + 06
8,984 6 35 5 31 4 36 3 47 27 55 25 79 260 2 4E + 06
257 2 5E + 06
D ET ER M IN E Df
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 700
Unbonded overlay modulus o f elasticity (psi) = 4,900,000
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K e« J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LOS Q
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
129 4 0 700 4 5 2 5 4,900,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
9 60 50 0 11,515,723
10 60 80 0 84 11,109,475
11 20 90 1 282 11,177,562
11 70 95 1 645 11,135,832
12 70 99 2 327 11,101,416
D ETER M IN E Deft
INPUT FjCU = 0 94 (assume 100 deteriorated cracks/mi)
Deff (in) = Fjcu * Dexist = 7 71
D ET ER M IN E OVERLAY THICKNESS
R E LIA B ILITY UBOL
LEV EL TH IC K
50 5 72
80 7 28
90 8 13
95 8 80
99 10 09
Appendix N N-93

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -17 UNBONDED JP C P OVERLAY O F JR C P (1-80)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 22,834,400
B A C K CALCULATIO N O F K eff
INPUT IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D« Di2 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K dyn SLAB Ec
dbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR
D ETER M IN E Df
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 640
Unbonded overlay modulus o f elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Px P2 Ec S„ LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
155 32 640 4 2 2 5 4,200,000 0 39 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
10 00 50 0 22,173,569
11 30 80 0 84 22,868,477
12 00 90 1 282 22,800,733
12 60 95 1 645 22,700,972
13 80 99 2 327 22,528,954
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjcu = 0 94 (assuming 100 deteriorated cracks/mi)
Deff (in) = Fjcu * Dexist = 9 40_________________________
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R E L IA B IL ITY UBOL
L EV EL T H IC K
50 3 41
80 6 27
90 7 46
95 8 39
99 10 10
N-94 Design of Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -18 UNBONDED JR C P OVERLAY O F C R C P (1-80)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 18,000,000
B A C K CALCULATIO N O F K eff
IN PU T IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 D 12 D24 d 36 AREA r e l s t if f Kdyn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 4 05 3 60 3 04 2 48 29 35 31 22 280 6 I E + 06
280 6 1E + 06
D ETER M IN E Dt
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 700
Unbonded overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) == 4,200,000
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LOS cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
140 32 700 4 5 2 5 4,200,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
9 10 50 0 18,868,828
10 10 80 0 84 18,552,355
10 60 90 1 282 17,756,688
11 10 95 1 645 17,885,002
12 09 99 2 327 18,092,891
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjcu = 0 96 (assume 50 deteriorated areas/mi in existing CRCP)
Deff (in) = F jCU * Dexist = 7 68
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R E L IA B IL IT Y UBOL
L EV EL TH ICK
50 4 88
80 6 56
90 7 31
95 8 01
99 9 34
Appendix N N-95

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SE-4 UNBONDED JP C P OVERLAY O F C R C P (1-85)_____________________________________________
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TRAFFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 57,000,000
B A C K CALCULATIO N O F Keff
INPUT IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 D 12 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K d yn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,502 8 08 7 19 5 94 4 67 28 97 29 88 162 3 0E + 06
162 3 0E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 700
Unbonded overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LOS cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
81 3 2 700 4 5 2 5 4,200,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
TRIAL COMPUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
11 10 50 0 59,227,683
12 20 80 0 84 56,580,476
12 90 90 1 282 57,770,394
13 50 95 1 645 58,671,505
14 60 99 2 327 57,732,613
D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjcu = 0 96 (assume 50 unrepaired areas/mi in existing CRCP)
Deff (in) = Fjcu * Dexist = 7 68____________________________________
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY TH ICK N ESS
R EL IA B IL IT Y UBOL
LEV EL T H IC K
50 8 01
80 9 48
90 10 36
95 11 10
99 12 42
N-96 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-22 UNBONDED JP C P OVERLAY O F JR C P (1-30)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 17,668,158
B A C K CALCULATIO N O F Keff
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D« D j2 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K(ly,i SLAB ]
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR
D ETER M IN E Df
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 710
Unbonded overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 5,100,000
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S0 LOS C„
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
53 3 2 710 4 5 2 5 5,100,000 0 39 0 00 1 01
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
9 30 50 0 17,483,863
10 40 80 0 84 17,272,377
11 10 90 1 282 18,026,295
11 60 95 1 645 17,540,132
12 70 99 2 327 17,638,108
DETER M IN E Deff
INPUT FjCU = 0 94 (assume 100 unrepaired deteriorated areas/mi)
Deff (in) = Fjcu * Dexist = 9 40
DETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKN ESS
R EL IA B ILITY UBOL
LEV EL TH IC K
50 ERR
80 4 45
90 5 90
95 6 80
99 8 54
Appendix N N-97

R EVISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-23 UNBONDED C P C P OVERLAY O F JR C P (1-30)
EX ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 10 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 17,668,158
BA CK CA LCU LA TIO N O F K eff
INPUT IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 d 12 d 24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K(!yn SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
0 0 0 0 0 ERR ERR ERR ERR
ERR ERR
D ETER M IN E Df
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 710
Unbonded overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 5,100,000
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LOS cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
53 3 2 710 45 2 5 5 ,1 0 0 ,0 0 0 0 39 0 00 1 01
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
9 30 50 0 1 7 ,4 8 3 ,8 6 3
10 40 80 0 84 1 7 ,2 7 2 ,3 7 7
11 10 90 1 282 1 8 ,0 2 6 ,2 9 5
11 60 95 1 645 1 7 ,5 4 0 ,1 3 2
12 70 99 2 327 1 7 ,6 3 8 ,1 0 8

D ETER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjcu = 0 98 (assume 25 unrepaired deteriorated areas/mi)
Deff (in) = FjCU * Dexist = 9 75_______________________________
D ET ER M IN E OVERLAY TH ICK N ESS
R EL IA B IL IT Y UBOL
LEV EL T H IC K
50 ERR
80 3 62
90 5 31
95 6 28
99 8 14
N-98 Design of Pavement Structures

R EV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -19 UNBONDED C R C P OVERLAY O F C R C P (1-80)
E X ISTIN G PA VEM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
Slab thickness 8 00 (in)
Future design lane ESALs = 18,000,000
B A C KCALCULATIO N O F K eff
IN PU T IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT RADIUS
LOAD D0 D12 D24 D36 AREA R E L ST IFF K (ly n SLAB E c
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (mils) (mils) (in) (in) (pci) (psi)
9,000 4 05 3 60 3 04 2 48 29 35 31 22 280 6 1E + 06
280 6 1E + 06
D ETER M IN E Df
Unbonded overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 700
Unbonded overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000
Vary trial D f until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pf P2 Ec S0 LOS Cd
(psi/in) (psi) (psi)
140 3 2 700 4 5 2 5 4,200,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs
(in) (millions)
9 10 50 0 18,868,828
10 10 80 0 84 18,552,355
10 60 90 1 282 17,756,688
11 10 95 1 645 17,885,002
12 09 99 2 327 18,092,891
D ET ER M IN E Deff
INPUT Fjc = 0 96 (assume 50 deteriorated areas/mi in existing CRCP)
Deff (in) = FjCU * Dexist = 7 68
D ETER M IN E OVERLAY THICKNESS
R EL IA B IL ITY UBOL
LEVEL T H IC K
50 4 88
80 6 56
90 7 31
95 8 01
99 9 34
Appendix N N-99

N 9.0 JPC P, JR CP, AND C R C P OVERLAY O F AC PAVEMENT

PCC Overlay
Region-* Existing Design Design Thickness
Project Pavement ESALs Reliability (in)
NW-9 AC 3,600,000 50 5 8
80 6 8
90 7 4
95 7 8
99 8 7

Effective k-value of 550 psi/inch used in design

NW-10 AC 2,300,000 50 55
80 64
90 69
95 74
99 82

Effective k-value of 425 psi/inch used in design

NW-11 AC 4,200,000 50 6 5
80 74
90 79
95 84
99 92

Effective k-value of 390 psi/inch used in design

MW-20 AC 150,000 50 —

80 —

90 4 1
95 4 5
99 5 3

Effective k-value of 460 psi/inch used in design

SE-5 AC 1,100,000 50 3 8
80 5 3
90 59
95 64
99 74

Effective k-value of 600 psi/inch used in design State design method indicates 6 4-inch
overlay is needed Agency constructed experimental sections 6, 7, and 8 inches thick which
provides for a range in design reliability from 90 to 99 percent
N-100 Design of Pavement Structures

PCC Overlay
Region- Existing Design Design Thickness
P roject Pavement ESALs Reliability (in)
SW-24 AC 11,000,000 50 7 3
80 8 4
90 9 0
95 9 5
99 10 4

Effective k-value of 650 psi/inch used in design

SW-25 AC 11,000,000 50 7 7
80 8 7
90 9 3
95 9 8
99 10 7

Effective k-value of 460 psi/inch used to obtain above thicknesses

Appendix N N-101

Sum m ary of Results for JPCP, JRCP, and CRCP Overlay of AC Pavement

1 Overall, it appears that the revised AASHTO overlay design procedures provide
reasonable JPCP and JRCP overlay thicknesses for AC pavements One project for
which the State designed and constructed three experimental thicknesses showed
consistent results
2 The effective k-value exhibited by an AC pavement as determined by Figure 3 3, Part
II, appears to be quite high No loss of support was applied to the k-value in these
examples However, the sensitivity of PCC overlay thickness to k-value is small
Additional work is greatly needed to investigate effective k-values for PCC overlays of
AC pavements, including deflection testing after overlay construction to verify the
effective k-value
3 The design reliability level is very significant Most of the projects were Interstate-
type highways A design reliability level ranging from 95 to 99 percent appears to be
reasonable for most projects
N-102 Design o f Pavement Structures

R EV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

NW-9 JP C P OVERLAY O F AC PAVEM ENT
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN
AC SURFACE 4 25 SUBGRADE: SANDY SILT, SANDY GRAVEL
CR STONE BASE 8 00
SUBBASE 0 00
TOTAL THICKNESS 12 25
Future design lane ESALs = 3,600,000
D ETER M IN E K etf
Vary Ep/M r until actual MR*D0/P matches computed MR*D0/p
IN PU T IN PU T INPUT SUBGRADE ACTUAL TR IA L COM PUTED
STATION LOAD D0, in Dr, in MR M R*D0/P E P/M R M R*D0/E p Ep
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (psi)
9,000 12 80 3 55 16,901 24 04 2 52 24 04 42,592
r = 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 12 38
Using Figure 3 3, Part II
1 ^ (dynamic) = 1,100 psi/in INPUT
Keff (static) = 550 psi/in
D ET ER M IN E Df
INPUT
PCC overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 690 (mean)
PCC overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000 (mean)
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pt Pi Ec S0 LOS Cd
(pci) (psi) (psi)
550 3 2 690 4 5 2 5 4,200,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs Dol
(in) (millions) (in)
5 80 50 0 3,667,987 5 80
6 80 80 0 84 3,581,992 6 80
7 40 90 1 282 3,720,304 7 40
7 80 95 1 645 3,607,745 7 80
8 70 99 2 327 3,717,080 8 70
Appendix N N-103

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

NW -10 JP C P OVERLAY O F AC PAVEM ENT (W hitney Hwy 071)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T D ESIG N AND FUTURE TRAFFIC
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN
AC SURFACE 4 00 SUBGRADE SANDY SILT, SANDY GRAVEL
CR STONE BASE 14 00
SUBBASE 0 00
TOTAL THICKNESS 18 00
Future design lane ESALs = 2,300,000
D ETER M IN E K eff
Vary Ep/M r until actual MR*D0/P matches computed MR* D0/p
SUBGRADE ACTUAL TR IA L COM PUTED
STA TIO N LOAD D0, in Dr, in Mr m r* d „/p E p/M r M r*D0/E p Ep
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (psi)
AVG 9,000 23 57 4 22 14,218 37 24 1 52 37 22 21,611
r 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 15 07
Using Figure 3 3, Part II
K eff (dynamic) = 850 psi/in INPUT
Keff (static) = 425 psi/in
D ETER M IN E Df
INPUT
PCC overlay modulus o f rupture (psi) = 690 (mean)
PCC overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000 (mean)
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LOS cd
(pci) (psi) (psi)
425 3 2 690 4 5 2 5 4,200,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs Dol
(in) (millions) (in)
5 50 50 0 2,342,259 5 50
6 40 80 0 84 2,260,563 6 40
6 90 90 1 282 2,240,718 6 90
7 40 95 1 645 2,358,520 7 40

8 20 99 2 327 2,339,577
N-104 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PT E R 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

NW-11 JP C P OVERLAY O F AC PAVEM ENT (W arm Springs Hwy 053)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
E X IST IN G PAVEM ENT DESIGN
AC SURFACE 5 50 SUBGRADE: SANDY SILT, SANDY GRAVEL
CR STONE BASE 12 00
SUBBASE 0 00
TOTAL THICKNESS 17 50
Future design lane ESALs = 4,200,000
D ET ER M IN E K eff
Vary Ep/M r until actual MR*D0/P matches computed MR*D0/p
SUBGRADE ACTUAL TR IA L COM PUTED
LOAD D0, in Dr, in mr m r * d 0/ p E P/M R M R*D0/E P EP
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (psi)
AVG 9,000 24 10 4 45 13,483 36 10 1 71 36 13 23,056
r = 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 15 22
Using Figure 3 3, Part II
Keff (dynamic) = 780 psi/in INPUT
Keff (static) = 390 psi/in
D ETER M IN E Df
INPUT
PCC overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 690 (mean)
PCC overlay modulus o f elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000 (mean)
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T IN P U T
Keff J Sc Pi P2 Ec So LOS Cd
(pci) (psi) (psi)
390 3 2 690 4 5 2 5 4 ,2 0 0 ,0 0 0 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs Dol
(in) (millions) (in)
6 50 50 0 4 ,4 9 5 ,6 6 9 6 50
7 40 80 0 84 4 ,2 8 6 ,4 9 2 7 40
7 90 90 1 282 4 ,2 3 8 ,3 1 6 7 90
8 40 95 1 645 4 ,4 3 3 ,5 9 6 8 40
9 20 99 2 327 4 ,3 1 2 ,9 1 8 9 20
Appendix N N-105

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

M W -20 JP C P OVERLAY O F AC PAVEM ENT (Newm ark Drive)
E X IST IN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TRAFFIC
EX ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN
AC SURFACE 1 50 SUBGRADE SANDY SILT, SANDY GRAVEL
ASPHALT BASE 6 00
SUBBASE 0 00
TOTAL THICKNESS 7 50
Future design lane ESALs = 150,000
D ETER M IN E K eff
Vary Ep/M r until actual MR*D0/P matches computed MR*D0/p
SUBGRADE ACTUAL TR IA L COM PUTED
STATION LOAD D0, in Dr, in Mr M R*D0/P e p/ m r m r *d 0/ e p E„
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (psi)
0 + 00 9,000 16 10 6 08 9,868 17 65 37 00 17 72 365,132
r = 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 17 98
2 + 00 9,000 18 10 4 37 13,730 27 61 4 45 27 43 61,098
r = 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 9 57
4 + 00 9,000 15 10 3 60 16,667 27 96 2 70 27 66 45,000
r = 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 8 40
6 + 00 9,000 18 00 5 67 10,582 21 16 18 00 21 24 190,476
r = 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 14 37
MEAN = 12,712 MEAN = 165,427
Using Figure 3 3, Part II
Keff (dynamic) = 920 psi/in INPUT
Keff (static) = 460 psi/in
D ETER M IN E Df
INPUT
PCC overlay modulus o f rupture (psi) = 690 (mean)
PCC overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000 (mean)
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LOS Cd
(pci) (psi) (psi)
460 4 0 690 4 5 2 5 4,200,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs Dol
(in) (millions) (in)
0 00 50 0 0 0 00
0 00 80 0 84 0 0 00
4 10 90 1 282 153,368 4 10
4 50 95 1 645 150,312 4 50
5 30 99 2 327 155,907 5 30
N-106 Design o f Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SE-5 JP C P OVERLAY O F AC PAVEM ENT (US 1)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
E X ISTIN G PAVEM ENT DESIGN
AC SURFACE 2 00 SUBGRADE SAND
CR STONE BASE 8 50
SUBBASE 12 00
TOTAL THICKNESS 22 50
Future design lane ESALs = 1,100,000
D ETER M IN E K eft
Vary Ep/M r until actual MR*D0/P matches computed MR*D0/p
SUBGRADE ACTUAL TR IA L COM PUTED
STATION LOAD D0, in Dr , in Mr M r*D0/P E p/M R M r*D0/E p Ep
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (psi)
9,000 12 96 1 86 24,604 35 43 0 80 35 63 19,683
r = 47 2
Check r > 0 7 ae = 15 19
Using Figure 3 3, Part II
Keff (dynamic) = 1,200 psi/in INPUT
Keff (static) = 600 psi/in
D ET ER M IN E Dt
INPUT
PCC overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 635 (mean)
PCC overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,000,000 (mean)
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec s. LOS Cd
(pci) (psi) (psi)
600 32 635 4 2 2 5 4,000,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
TR IA L COM PUTED
D, R Z ESALs Dol
(in) (millions) (in)
3 80 50 0 1,173,786 3 80
5 30 80 0 84 1,127,398 5 30
5 90 '• 90 1 282 1,114,201 5 90
6 40 95 1 645 1,108,802 6 40
7 40 99 2 327 1,162,870 7 40
Appendix N N-107

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-24 JP C P OVERLA Y O F AC PAVEM ENT (P roj. 6044)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM EN T DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
EX ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN
AC SURFACE 8 00 SUBGRADE: ?
CR STONE BASE 3 00
SUBBASE 10 40
TOTAL THICKNESS 21 40
Future design lane ESALs = 11,000,000
D ETER M IN E K eff
Vary Ep/M r until actual MR*D0/P matches computed MR*D0/p
SUBGRADE ACTUAL TR IA L COM PUTED
STATION LOAD D0, in Dr, in Mr M r*D0/P E p/M „ m r *d 0/ e p EP
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (psi)
8,222 7 65 3 25 16,866 15 69 3 40 15 62 57,343
r = 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 22 90
Using Figure 3 3, Part II
Keff (dynamic) = 1,300 psi/in INPUT
Keff (static) = 650 psi/in
D ETER M IN E Df
INPUT
PCC overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 690 (mean)
PCC overlay modulus of elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000 (mean)
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LOS Cd
(pci) (psi) (psi)
650 32 690 4 5 2 5 4,200,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
TRIA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs Dol
(in) (millions) (in)
7 30 50 0 11,020,270 7 30
8 40 80 0 84 11,221,706 8 40
9 00 90 1 282 11,401,365 9 00
9 50 95 1 645 11,503,539 9 50
10 40 99 2 327 11,183,953 10 40
Dowels used in transverse joints due to high traffic
Edge drains recommended
N-108 Design of Pavement Structures

REV ISED C H A PTER 5 AASHTO DESIGN GUIDE OVERLAY DESIGN

SW-25 J P C P OVERLAY O F AC PAVEM ENT (P roj. 0512)
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN AND FUTURE TR A FFIC
E X ISTIN G PA V EM ENT DESIGN
AC SURFACE 4 50 SUBGRADE ?
CR STONE BASE 7 50
SUBBASE 20 00
TOTAL THICKNESS 32 00
Future design lane ESALs = 11,000,000
D ETER M IN E K eff
Vary Ep/M r until actual MR*D0/P matches computed M R*D0/p
SUBGRADE ACTUAL TR IA L COM PUTED
STATION LOAD Do, in Dr, in MR m r*d 0/ p e p/ m r M R*D0/E p EP
(lbs) (mils) (mils) (psi)
9,171 19 29 4 07 15,022 31 60 1 70 31 31 25,538
r 36
Check r > 0 7 ae = 27 05
Using Figure 3 3, Part II
Keff (dynamic) = 920 psi/in INPUT
Kgff (static) = 460 psi/in
D ETER M IN E Df
INPUT
PCC overlay modulus of rupture (psi) = 690 (mean)
PCC overlay modulus o f elasticity (psi) = 4,200,000 (mean)
Vary trial Df until computed ESALs equal future design ESALs
IN PU T INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT INPUT
K eff J Sc Pi P2 Ec S„ LOS cd
(pci) (psi) (psi)
460 32 690 4 5 2 5 4,200,000 0 35 0 00 1 00
T R IA L COM PUTED
Df R Z ESALs Dol
(in) (millions) (in)
7 70 50 0 11,406,841 7 70
8 70 80 0 84 11,208,695 8 70
9 30 90 1 282 11,497,917 9 30
9 80 95 1 645 11,664,562 9 80
10 70 99 2 327 11,410,746 10 70
 INDEX

AASHO ROAD TEST BREAK AND SEAT TECHNIQUE, III-106, III-107

Background, ix to x, vii to viii to III-108
In design procedures, II-3 to II-4
Joint faulting in, 11-37 CAPITAL COSTS, 1-44 to 1-47
Limitations of, 1-12 to 1-13, II-4 CASAGRANDE FLOW EQUATION, 1-20
Objectives of, II-3 CBR VALUE
AGENCY COSTS, 1-44 Converting to resilient modulus, 1-14
AGGREGATE INTERLOCK, 111-62 CITY STREETS
AGGREGATE-SURFACED ROADS Load equivalency values for, 1-13
Aggregate loss in, 11-12 COEFFICIENT OF PERMEABILITY See
Low-volume, 11-69 to 11-77, 11-81 Permeability
Rutting in, 11-12, 11-72 to 11-77 COLD MILLING
AGING EFFECTS, 1-8, 1-13 Prior to overlay, III-105, III-135
ANALYSIS PERIOD, 1-43, 1-46 to 1-47 Rehabilitation, 111-67, 111-68, 111-81
Definition of, II-6 COMPOSITE PAVEMENTS, 1-15
ASPHALT-AGGREGATE SURFACE Load equivalency factors for, I-10
TREATMENTS, ffl-71, 111-72 COMPUTERS/COMPUTER PROGRAMS
ASPHALT CONCRETE See also Flexible For design, II-4
pavements In mechanistic-empirical design, IV-9
Layer coefficients, 1-6, III-104, III-105 CONCRETE
Milling of, 111-81 Shrinkage, 11-28
Overlay over fractured portland cement concrete Tensile strength, 11-28
pavement, III-106 to III-113 Thermal coefficient, 11-29
Overlays, over asphalt concrete, 111-94 to III-106 CONDITION SURVEY, 1-5, 111-28 to 111-30 See
Rutting in, 111-81 also Field data collection
Temperature effects, 1-22, 1-27 CONTINUOUSLY REINFORCED
CONCRETE PAVEMENTS See also
BASE COURSE Rigid pavements
Bituminous-treated, layer coefficient, 11-22, 11-24 Asphalt concrete over, III-113 to III-125
Cement-treated, layer coefficient, 11-22, 11-23 Distress survey, 111-28, 111-30
Crushed stone, layer coefficient value, 1-6 Friction factor, 11-29
Drainage, 1-28 Full-depth repairs to, 111-63, III-114
Flexible pavement Load transfer in, 11-26
compaction of, 1-17 Reinforcement steel design in, 11-29, 11-51 to
definition of, 1-17 11-62
Layer coefficient for, 1-17 Reinforcement variables in design of, 11-28 to
materials for construction, 1-17 II-II-29
pozzolonic stabilized, 1-17 Subsealing repairs, 111-66
Granular, layer coefficients, 11-17 to 11-20 CORK EXPANSION JOINT FILLER, 1-21
Seasonal effects, 1-27 CORNER DEFLECTION ANALYSIS, 111-41 to
Thickness, 11-35 111-45
BITUMINOUS MIXTURES COST EFFECTIVENESS See also Economic
For drainage layer, 1-19 analyses
For patching, 111-63 to 111-64 Pavement management strategies and, 1-31
BONDED CONCRETE OVERLAYS, III-136 to CRACK AND SEAT TECHNIQUE, III-106,
III-145 III-107

1
2 Design of Pavement Structures

CRACKS/CRACKING Analysis period in, II-6

Full-depth repair of, 111-62 to 111-63 Drainage, 11-22 to 11-25
Joint load transfer efficiency, 111-70 to 111-71 Effective modulus of subgrade reaction, 11-16
Process of, 11-51 Effective roadbed soil resilient modulus, 11-12 to
Reflection crack control in overlay rehabilitation, 11-15
III-145, III-153 Environmental variables in, 11-10
Reflection crack control in overlays, 111-80, Input requirements, II-5, II-7
III-95, III-108, III-114 to III-l 15, III-127 to Layer coefficients for flexible pavements, 11-17 to
III-128, III-137 11-22
Repairs in asphalt concrete overlay to asphalt Limitations, II-4
concrete pavement, 111-94 to III-95 Load transfer, 11-25 to 11-27
Sealing techniques for, 111-65, 111-66, 111-72 Modulus of rupture, 11-16 to 11-17
CRCP See Continuously reinforced concrete Pavement layer materials characterization, 11-16
pavements Pavement structural characteristics, 11-22 to 11-27
CREEP SPEED DEFLECTION Performance criteria in, 11-10 to 11-12
Seasonal variation, 1-26 Reinforcement variables, 11-27 to 11-29
CRUSHED STONE Reliability as variable in, II-9 to 11-10
Layer coefficient value, 1-6 Scope of, II-3 to II-4
Time variables in, II-5 to II-6
DEFLECTION ANALYSIS, HI-30 to 111-32 See Traffic variables in, II-6 to II-9
also Nondestructive testing DESIGN TRIALS, 1-34, 1-37
DEFORMED WIRE FABRIC Overlays for, 1-34, 1-35, 1-36
Allowable working stress, 11-28 DESTRUCTIVE TESTING, 111-45
Development in slab, 1-21 Asphalt concrete overlays, 111-97, III-101, III-110
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS See also Design Jointed pavement evaluation, III-120
requirements Necessity for, 111-49
Basic design equations, 1-5 to 1-7 For structural capacity evaluation, III-88
Drainage, 1-27 to 1-29 DIAMOND GRINDING, 111-67 to 111-68, 111-76
Environmental effects, 1-22 to 1-27 DISCOUNT RATE, 1-43, 1-47 to 1-48, 1-49
Flexible pavement DISTRIBUTION OF LOAD
basic equations, 1-5 to 1-6 in Continuously reinforced pavements, 11-26
materials for construction of, 1-16 to 1-20 Design inputs, 11-25
Freezing index in, 1-25 Directional, I-11
Frost heave in, 1-8 In jointed pavements, 11-25 to 11-26
Initial pavement smoothness in, 1-8 Joint transfer load analysis, 111-32, 111-35, III-38
Local experience in, 1-5 to III-41
In mechanistic-empirical design, IV-8 Lane distribution, 1-11, II-6 to II-9
In overlays, III-79, 111-80 to 111-83 Load transfer coefficient for, 11-25
Pavement management systems and, 1-31 to 1-34, In tied shoulders, 11-26 to 11-27
1-35 DOWELS
Rigid pavement Full-depth repairs, 111-62
basic equations, 1-6 to 1-7 Load-transfer, 1-22
materials for construction, 1-21 to 1-22 Placement, 11-25
Roadbed soil in, 1-13 to 1-15 In restoring joint load transfer efficiency, III-71
Shoulder, 1-29 DRAINAGE
Tie bars, 1-22 Climactic zone map, 111-26 to 111-27
Traffic loads, 1-10 to 1-12 Flexible pavement design inputs, 11-22 to 11-25
DESIGNED PAVEMENT SECTION, 1-53 to 1-54 Major sources of water infiltration, 111-65 to III-66
DESIGN PERIOD Pavement surface, 1-28
Definition of, 1-53 Quality levels, 11-22
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS In rehabilitation, 1-28 to 1-29
Aggregate loss, 11-12 Rehabilitation survey, III-21 to 111-28
Allowable rutting, 11-12 Rigid pavement design inputs, 11-25
Index 3

Roadbed soil considerations, 1-15 ESALS See EQUIVALENT SINGLE AXLE

Subdrainage design in rehabilitation, III-68, 111-76 LOADS (ESALS)
to III-77 EVALUATION PROCEDURES
Thawing effects and, 1-23, 1-27 For pavement rehabilitation, 1-5
Water entrapment effects, 1-27 to 1-28 EXPANSION JOINTS
DRAINAGE LAYER, 1-28 In rehabilitation, 111-69 to 111-70
Casagrande flow equation for, 1-20 Sealing materials, 1-21, 11-50
Flexible pavement
cross section, 1-17, 1-18 FIELD DATA COLLECTION See also
materials for construction, 1-17 to 1-20 Nondestructive testing
Subbase as, 1-16 Asphalt concrete/continuously reinforced concrete,
DURABILITY ADJUSTMENT FACTOR, III-123 III-129, III-132
Asphalt concrete/jointed pavements, III-129,
ECONOMIC ANALYSES See also LIFE-CYCLE III-132
COSTS Asphalt concrete over portland cement concrete,
Agency costs in, 1-44 III-109, III-110
Analysis period in, 1-46 to 1-47 Asphalt concrete pavements, 111-96, 111-97
Basic concepts in, 1-41 to 1-42 Condition survey, 111-28 to 111-30
Discounting in, 1-47 to 1-48 Continuously reinforced concrete evaluation,
Equations for, 1-49 to 1-51 III-147
Inflation costs in, 1-48 to 1-49 Destructive testing for, 111-45, III-49
Investment costs in, 1-44 to 1-47 Drainage survey, III-21 to 111-28
Pavement benefits in, 1-46 Functional condition, assessment of, 111-60
Pavement evaluation expenditures, III-12 Goals of, III-19
O f rehabilitation, 1-44 to 1-45 Jointed pavement evaluation, III-117 to III-120,
Reliability in, 1-63 III-138, III-140, III-141 to III-143, III-146 to
Residual/salvage value, 1-43, 1-45 III-147
Terminology, 1-42 to 1-44 Jointed pavement overlays, III-154
Transportation improvement costs in, 1-42 Joint load transfer efficiency, III-70 to 111-71
User benefits in, valuation of, 1-42 to 1-44 Limits of statistical accuracy, III-49 to HI-50 to
Valuation methods, 1-47 III-57
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Major parameters of, III-49
Present worth calculation, 1-49 to 1-51 In mechanistic-empirical design, IV-8 to IV-9,
ELASTIC MODULUS, 11-16 See also RESILIENT IV-10
MODULUS (Mr) For nonoverlay rehabilitation, 111-59 to 111-60
Correlation for portland cement concrete, 11-16 For overlay design, 111-83 to III-84
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS See also For partial-depth pavement repair, 111-64
Temperature effects Pavement response variables, III-19 to 111-21
In deflection testing, 111-32 Rehabilitation concepts, III-9 to III-12
As design variables, 11-10 Sampling tests, 111-45, 111-49
Resilient modulus varying with, 1-23, 1-24, 1-25 For structural capacity evaluation, 111-86 to 111-88
to 1-27, 11-13 Unit of analysis in, III-19 to III-21, 111-49
Seasonal variation in resilient modulus, 11-13 FILTER LAYER
Serviceability and, 1-8, 1-9, 11-10, 11-11 Flexible pavement, 1-20
EQUIVALENT SINGLE AXLE LOADS (ESALS), FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
1-10 Asphalt concrete overlays over, 111-94 to III-105
In calculating performance period, I-10 to 1-12 Base course, 1-17
In overlay design procedures, III-80 to 111-81 Basic design equations, 1-5 to 1-6
In reliability calculations, 1-54, 1-55 Cold milling in rehabilitation of, 111-67, 111-68
Truck equivalency factors in estimating, 1-10 Cross section, 1-3, 1-4
EQUIVALENT UNIFORM ANNUAL COST Distress survey, 111-28, 111-29
(BENEFIT), 1-43, 1-47, 1-51 Drainage design inputs, 11-22 to 11-25
Equation for, 1-49 Drainage effects, 1-28
4 Design of Pavement Structures

Drainage layer, 1-17 to 1-20 Drainage assessment of, 111-25, III-26

Effective roadbed resilient modulus, 11-13 to 11-15 Subbase, coefficients for, 11-20 to 11-22
Filter material, 1-20 GROUT MIXTURES, 111-66 to III-67
Frost heave in, 11-33 to 11-35
Layered design analysis, 11-35 to 11-37 HIGHWAY INVESTMENT COST, 1-42
Low-volume road design, 11-69, 11-77 to 11-81 HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE COST, 1-42, 1-44
Materials for construction, 1-16 to 1-20 HIGHWAY USER COSTS, 1-42, 1-44, 1-45 to 1-46
Mechanistic-empirical design procedures for, IV-3 HYDROPLANING EFFECTS, III-84
Nonoverlay rehabilitation strategies, 111-60, 111-61
Prepared roadbed, definition of, 1-16 INCREMENTAL COSTS, 1-43
Resilient Modulus for, 1-15 to 1-16 INFLATION, ECONOMIC, 1-48 to 1-49
Roadbed swelling, 11-33 to 11-35 INITIAL SERVICEABILITY INDEX
Selection of layer thickness, 11-35 Definition of, 1-8
Shoulder design and, 1-29 In performance criteria, 11-10
Stabilization materials, 1-16 INTEREST RATE, 1-43
Stage construction of, 11-33 INVESTMENT COSTS, 1-44 to 1-47
Structural capacity of, 111-85
Structural capacity survey, 111-87 J-FACTORS See Distribution of load
Structural number design nomograph, 11-31 to JOINTED PAVEMENTS
11-32 Asphalt concrete overlay over, III-113 to III-125
Subbase course, 1-16 to 1-17 Distress survey, HI-28, 111-29
Surface course, 1-20 Full-depth repair of, 111-62 to 111-63
FOG SEAL, III-72 Load transfer in, 11-25 to 11-26
FREEZING INDEX, 1-25 Overlay design, III-153 to III-156
FREEZING-THAWING Plain, 11-27
Effects of, 1-23 to 1-27 Reinforced concrete, 11-27
Seasonal variations, 1-23, 1-24 friction factor, 11-28
FRICTION slab length, 11-27 to 11-28
Functional evaluation of, 111-84 steel reinforcement design nomograph, 11-51
Resistance at pavement-tire interface, 1-7 steel working stress, 11-28
FRICTION FACTORS Restoration of joint load transfer, 111-70 to III-71
Continuously reinforced concrete pavement, 11-29 Slab length, design variables in, 11-27 to 11-28
Jointed reinforced concrete pavements, 11-28 Subsealing repairs, 111-66
FROST HEAVE JOINT LOAD TRANSFER
Cause of, 1-23 Analysis, 111-32, 111-35, 111-38 to 111-41
Design considerations, 1-8 Asphalt concrete/continuously reinforced concrete
Effect on present serviceability index, 1-8 pavements, III-131 to III-132
In flexible pavement structural design, 11-33 to Restoration, 111-70 to 111-71
II-35 JOINTS
Predicting frost penetration, 1-25 In bonded concrete overlay, III-143
In rigid pavements, 11-47 to 11-48 Cracks as, 111-66
Roadbed effects, 1-14 to 1-15, 1-23 to 1-27 Dimensions of, 11-49 to 11-50
FULL-DEPTH REPAIRS, HI-62 to 111-64, 111-76, In jointed pavement overlays, III-155
III-114 Layout of, 11-49
FUNCTIONAL PERFORMANCE Load transfer efficiency, restoring, 111-70 to III-71
Definition of, 1-7 Longitudinal, 1-22
Structural performance vs , in overlay design, Nondowelled, J-factor for, 11-37
III-81 Portland cement concrete overlay, III-82
Surface friction evaluation, 111-84 Pressure relief, III-69 to 111-70, 111-76
Surface roughness evaluation, 111-84 to 111-85 Rigid pavement, structural design, 11-48 to 11-50
Role of, 11-48 to 11-49
GRANULAR LAYERS Sealing of, 1-21, 11-50, 111-65 to 111-66, 111-76
Base, coefficients for, 11-17 to 11-20 Slab-void detection, 111-32, 111-35, 111-41 to 111-45
Index 5

Spacing of, 11-49 Effective roadbed resilient modulus calculations

Transverse, 1-65 to 11-66 for, 11-13
load-transfer devices for, 1-22 Freezing index, 1-25
In unbonded overlays, III-151 regional season length, map of, 11-69, 11-70, 11-71
JOINT SEALING MATERIALS Seasonal effects, 1-27
Categories of, 111-66 LONGITUDINAL JOINTS, 1-22
In construction joints, 11-50 LOSS OF SUPPORT
In contraction joints, 11-50 Design inputs, 11-27
Cork expansion joint filler, 1-21 Role of, 11-37
In expansion joints, 11-50 LOW-VOLUME ROADS
Liquid, 1-21 Aggregate-surfaced, 11-69 to 1-77, 11-81
Preformed elastomeric, 1-21 Design catalog, 11-77 to 11-86
Flexible pavement, 11-69, 11-77 to 11-81
LANE DISTRIBUTION FACTORS, 1-11, II-6 to Rigid pavement, 11-69, II-81
II-9
LAYER COEFFICIENTS MAINTENANCE COSTS, 1-42, 1-44
Asphalt concrete surface course, II-17, 11-18 MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION
Average values, 1-6 Of flexible pavements, 1-16 to 1-20
Bituminous-treated base, 11-22, 11-24 Nonstandard, 1-3
Cement-treated base, 11-22, 11-23 Overlay considerations, 111-81
Drainage, 11-22 to 11-25 Pavement layer, characterization of, 11-16
For flexible pavement base course design, 1-17 Recycling, 1-45
For flexible pavement subbase design, 1-16 Reinforcement, design variables in, 11-27 to 11-29
Granular base, 11-17 to 11-20 Rigid pavement, 1-21 to 1-22
Granular subbase, 11-20 to 11-22 MECHANISTIC-EMPIRICAL DESIGN
For in-service asphalt concrete pavements, PROCEDURES, x
III-104, III-105 Background, IV-3 to IV-4
Resilient modulus test for, II-3, ix Benefits of, IV-4, IV-10
Role of, 11-17 Design considerations, IV-8
LAYERED DESIGN ANALYSIS, 11-35 to 11-37 Equipment for, IV-9
LIFE-CYCLE COSTS Framework for, IV-4 to IV-7
Definition of, 1-41 Implementation, IV-7 to IV-10
In design trials, 1-34, 1-36 Input data, IV-8 to IV-9
Discounting and, 1-47 to 1-48, 1-49 Testing procedures, IV-10
Inflation in, 1-48 to 1-49 Training personnel in, IV-9 to IV-10
Mechanistic-empirical design procedures and, MODULUS OF RUPTURE
IV-7 Concrete, 11-28
O f nonoverlay rehabilitation techniques, 111-73 to Field data collection for, 111-49
111-74 Portland cement concrete, 11-16 to 11-17
Pavement management systems and, 1-34 MODULUS OF SUBGRADE REACTION, 11-16
Role of, in economic analysis, 11-31 Estimating, 11-37 to 11-44
In selecting rehabilitation solution, III-15 In low-volume road design, 11-69
LOAD EQUIVALENCY FACTORS Variables in, 11-37
Limitations of, 1-12 to 1-13 MOTOR VEHICLE RUNNING COSTS, 1-42, 1-46
Source of, I-10
For urban streets, 1-13 NETWORK LEVEL PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT,
LOAD TRANSFER See Distribution of load 1-31, 1-39
LOAD-TRANSFER DEVICES, 1-22 Project feasibility analysis in, 1-41
LOCAL CONDITIONS Rehabilitation considerations in, III-12
Climactic zones, map of, 111-26 to 111-27 NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING
In design considerations, 1-5 Asphalt concrete pavements, III-101 to III-102
In drainage evaluation, 111-25 Deflection interpretation in, 111-30 to 111-32
6 Design o f Pavement Structures

Evaluating structural capacity, 111-32, 111-35 to thickness design, III-128 to III-135

III-38 widening, III-136
Joint load transfer analysis, 111-32, 111-35, 111-38 Asphalt concrete over asphalt concrete/jointed
to 111-41 pavements
Slab-void detection, 111-32, 111-35, 111-41 to 111-45 construction tasks, III-125
For structural capacity evaluation, III-88 feasibility, III-125 to III-127
For subgrade resilient modulus, 111-91 preoverlay repair, III-127
In thickness deficiency approach, III-4 reflection crack control, III-127 to III-128
Types of, 111-32, ffl-35, iii-45 shoulders, III-135
NONOVERLAY REHABILITATION subdrainage, HI-128
STRATEGIES surface milling, III-135
Cold milling, 111-67, 111-68 thickness design, III-128 to III-135
Development of, 111-60 to 111-62 widening, III-136
Diamond grinding, III-67 to 111-68, 111-76 Asphalt concrete over continuously reinforced
Evaluation of pavement condition for, HI-59 to concrete
111-60 construction tasks, III-113
Full-depth repair, 111-62 to 111-64, 111-76 feasibility, III-113
Partial-depth repair, 111-64 to III-65, HI-76 preoverlay repairs, III-113 to III-114
Performance prediction of, 111-73 to 111-78 reflection crack control, III-114 to III-115
Pressure relief joints, HI-69 to 111-70, 111-76 shoulders, III-125
Restoring joint load transfer efficiency, 111-70 to subdrainage, III-115
111-71 thickness design, III-115 to III-125
Subdrainage design considerations in, 111-68, widening, III-125
III-76 to III-77 Asphalt concrete over jointed pavements
Surface treatments, III-71 to 111-73, 111-76 construction tasks, III-113
feasibility, III-113
OPEN-GRADED FRICTION COURSES, 111-71, preoverlay repair, III-113 to III-114
111-72 reflection crack control, III-114 to III-l 15
OVERLAYS See also Rehabilitation shoulders, III-125
Adjustments to thickness subdrainage, III-115
design considerations, 111-83 thickness design, III-115 to III-125
Alternatives to, 1-5 widening, III-125
Asphalt concrete over asphalt concrete Asphalt concrete over portland cement concrete
construction tasks, III-94 construction tasks, III-106 to III-107
feasibility, 111-94 feasibility, III-107 to III-108
preoverlay repair, 111-94 to 111-95 pavement widening in, III-82 to IH-83,
reflection crack control, 111-95 III-lll
shoulders, III-105 preoverlay repair, III-108
structural number calculations, III-lOl to reflection crack control, III-108
III-104 shoulders, I I I - lll
subdrainage, 111-95 subdrainage, III-108
surface milling, III-105 thickness design, III-108 to I I I - lll
thickness design, III-95 to III-105 Bonded concrete
widening, III-106 bonding procedures, III-145
Asphalt concrete over asphalt construction tasks, III-136
concrete/continuously reinforced concrete feasibility, III-136 to III-137
construction tasks, III-125 joints, III-143
feasibility, III-125 to III-127 preoverlay repair, III-137
preoverlay repair, III-127 reflection crack control, III-137
reflection crack control. III-127 to III-128 shoulders, III-143
shoulders, III-135 subdrainage, III-137
subdrainage, III-128 thickness design, III-137 to III-143
surface milling, III-135 widening, III-145
Index 7

Design considerations PARTIAL-DEPTH PAVEMENT REPAIR, III-64 to

existing portland cement concrete slab 111-65, 111-76
durability, III-82 PATCHING, III-63 to III-64
levels of reliability, 111-82 Partial-depth, 111-64 to 111-65
materials, 111-81 PAVEMENT BENEFITS, 1-46
milling asphalt concrete surfaces, III-81 PAVEMENT DESIGN-PERFORMANCE
pavement evaluation, 111-83 to 111-94 PROCESS, 1-56 to 1-62
pavement widening, 111-82 to 111-83 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (PMS)
portland cement concrete overlay joints, 111-82 Definition, 1-31
portland cement concrete overlay reinforcement, Design and, 1-31 to 1-34, 1-35
111-82 Guidelines for, 1-39
preoverlay repair, 111-80 Mechanistic-empirical design procedures in, IV-4
recycling existing pavement, 111-81 Network level in, 1-31, 1-32, 1-39
reflection crack control, 111-80, III-108 Pavement type selection in, 1-39
resilient modulus in, 111-91 to 111-94 Project level in, 1-31, 1-32
rutting in asphaltic concrete, III-81 Role of, 1-31, 1-34, 1-36
shoulders, 111-81 to 111-82 State use of, 1-34, 1-39
structural, vs functional, overlays, III-81 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
subdrainage, 111-81 Definition of, 1-56
traffic loadings, 111-80 to 111-81
Drainage effects, 1-28
Feasibility of, 111-79 to III-80
Elements of, 1-7 to 1-8
Functional evaluation for, 111-84 to III-85
PERFORMANCE PERIOD
Jointed pavement
Definition of, I-10 to 1-11, II-5 to II-6
construction tasks, III-153
Maximum, II-6
feasibility, III-153
Minimum, II-6
joints, III-155
PERFORMANCE TRENDS, 1-8, 1-9
preoverlay repair, III-153
PERMEABILITY
reflection crack control, III-153
Of drainage layer materials, 1-17, 1-19
reinforcement, III-155
shoulders, III-155 PMS See PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
subdrainage, III-153 POROUS CONCRETE LAYERS, 1-21
thickness design, III-154 to III-155 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE
widening, III-155 Asphalt concrete overlay on, III-106 to III-113
worksheet, III-156 Diamond grinding of, 111-67 to 111-68, III-76
Mechanistic-empirical design procedures for, Elastic modulus correlation for, 11-16
IV-4, IV-7 Frost penetration, calculating, 1-25
Point-By-Point Approach, III-84 Modulus of rupture, 11-16 to 11-17
Role of, 111-79 Overlay design considerations, 111-82
Skid-resistance considerations, III-3 Specifications for, 1-21
Structural analysis methodology, III-3 to III-4 PREPARED ROADBED
Structural evaluation for, 111-85 to III-91 Definition of, 1-16
Thickness deficiency concept of, III-4 PRESENT SERVICEABILITY INDEX (PSI)
TVpes of, 111-79 In definition of pavement performance, 1-56
Unbonded Environmental effects on, 1-8, 1-9, 1-27
construction tasks, III-145 Minimum, 1-44
Joints, III-151 Pavement life-cycle and, 1-8
preoverlay repair, III-145 In reliability calculations, 1-54, 1-55
reflection crack control, III-145 Role of, 11-10
reinforcement, III-151 Source of, 1-7 to 1-8
separation interlayer, III-153 PRESENT VALUE, 1-43
shoulders, III-151 PRESENT WORTH
subdrainage, III-146 Calculation for, 1-49 to 1-51
thickness design, III-146 to III-151 PRESSURE RELIEF JOINTS, 111-69 to 111-70,
Uniform section approach, III-84 111-76
8 Design of Pavement Structures

PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PAVEMENTS In overlay design, III-82

Fatigue in, 11-66 Pavement performance variables in, 1-56
Magnitude of prestress in, 11-66 Probability distribution of basic deviations, 1-57
Pavement thickness, 11-66 to 11-67 to 1-60
Prestress losses, 11-67 Role of, II-3
Slab length, 11-65 to 11-66 Stage construction alternatives and, 1-63
Structural design, 11-65, 11-66 to 67 REMAINING LIFE EVALUATION, 111-88 to 111-91
Subbase, 11-65 Asphalt concrete pavements, III-104 to III-105
Subgrade restraint, 11-67 Continuously reinforced concrete pavements,
Tendon spacing, 11-66 III-123 to III-125
Jointed pavement, III-123 to III-125, III-143
RECYCLING, 1-45 Portland cement concrete pavements, III-151
Rehabilitation and, III-7, III-81 RESIDUAL VALUE, 1-43, 1-45
REHABILITATION See also Nonoverlay RESILIENT MODULUS (Mr)
rehabilitation strategies, Overlays CBR conversions to, 1-14
Construction considerations, III-7 Climactic region and, 11-71
Cost analysis in, III-15 to III-16 Definition of, 1-13
Definition of, 1-45, III-7 Design value, 1-15
Drainage considerations in, 1-28 to 1-29, 111-21 Direct measurement of, ix
Evaluation procedures, 1-5 Effective annual, 1-27
Initial capital costs in, 1-44 to 1-45 Effective roadbed soil, 11-12 to 11-15
Limitations, III-4 Laboratory, vs field, tests for, 11-17
Maintenance vs , III-7 For low-volume roads, 11-69, 11-71
M ajor categories of, III-7 Overlay design, 111-91 to 111-94, 111-96 to 111-97
Major factors in, III-7 to III-8 Role of, 1-13 to 1-14
Method of, selection process for, III-8 to III-16 R-value conversions to, 1-14
Nonmonetary considerations in, III-15 to III-16 Seasonal variations, 1-23, 1-24, 1-25 to 1-27, 11-13
In performance-based approach, III-3 RIGID PAVEMENTS See also Continuously
Problem definition in, III-9 to III-12 reinforced concrete pavements, Jointed
Project constraints, III-12 pavements
Project-specific decision-making in, II1-8 to III-9 Application of rehabilitation procedures to, III-4
Recycling concepts in, 1-45, III-7, 111-81 Basic design equations, 1-6 to 1-7
Slab subsealing, III-41, 111-66 to HI-67, 111-76 Cross section, 1-3, 1-4
Traffic delay costs in, 1-46 Diamond grinding in rehabilitation of, 111-67 to
REINFORCEMENT See also Jointed pavements, III-68, 111-76
reinforced concrete Drainage design inputs, 11-25
Design variables, 11-27 to 11-29 Drainage effects, 1-28
In jointed pavement overlays, III-155 Frost heave in, 11-47 to 11-48
Rigid pavement, structural design, 11-51 to 11-65 Joint dimensions, 11-49 to 11-50
Steel, in rigid pavement slab, 1-21 Joint layout, 11-49
Transverse, 11-62 to 11-65 Joint load transfer analysis, 111-32, III to 35,
In unbonded overlays, III-151 III-38 to 111-41
RELIABILITY Joint sealant dimensions, 11-50
Axle load variables in, 1-54 Joint sealing materials, 1-21, 11-50, 111-66
Compounding of, in stage construction, 11-33, Joint spacing, 11-49
11-44 Joint types, 11-48 to 11-49
Definition of, 1-53 Load transfer in, 1-22, 11-25
Definition of pavement condition in, 1-54 to 1-56 Longitudinal joint materials, 1-22
Design factor, 1-56 to 1-62 Loss of support in, 11-27
As design variable, II-9 to 11-10 Low-volume road design, 11-69, 11-81
Factor, 1-6 to 1-7, 1-12, II-9 Mechanistic-empirical design procedures for,
Level, 1-60 to 1-63, II-9 IV-3
Overall standard deviations in calculating, 1-62 Modulus of rupture for, 11-16 to 11-17
Index 9

Modulus of subgrade reaction, 11-16, 11-37 to SANDY GRAVEL

II-44 layer coefficient value, 1-6
Nonoverlay rehabilitation strategies, 111-60, 111-61 SEASONAL EFFECTS, 1-23 to 1-27 See also
Partial-depth repair, 111-64 to 111-65 Environmental effects
Patching, with bituminous mixtures, 111-63 to Climactic zOnes, map of, 111-26 to 111-27
III-64 Effective resilient modulus, 1-26, 11-13
Pavement slab, 1-21 In modulus of subgrade reaction calculations,
Portland cement concrete for, 1-21 11-37, 11-44
Reinforcing steel in, 1-21 Regional season length, map of, 11-69, 11-70,
Roadbed swelling in, 11-47 to 11-48 II-71
Slab thickness design nomograph, 11-44 SEPARATION INTERLAYER, III-153
Slab-void detection, 111-32, 111-35, 111-41 to III-45 SERVICEABILITY
Stage construction, 11-44 to 11-47 Definition of, 11-10
Structural capacity, 111-85, 111-87 In design trials, 1-34, 1-37
Subbase, 1-21 Environmental effects on, 1-8, 11-10, 11-11
Subsealing of, 111-66 to 111-67, 111-76 Factors in loss of, 1-8
Tie bars in, 1-22 Frost-heave effects, 1-23
Transverse reinforcement design, 11-62 to 11-65 Initial serviceability index, 1-8, 11-10
ROADBED SOIL(S) Pavement benefits and, 1-46
Compaction criteria, 1-14 Present serviceability index (PSI), 1-7 to 1-8, 1-9,
In design equation, 1-53 to 1-54 I-44, 1-54, 1-55, 1-56, 11-10
Drainage considerations, 1-15 Terminal serviceability index, 1-8, 11-10
Exceptional types of, 1-3, 1-14 to 1-15 SERVICEABILITY-PERFORMANCE CONCEPT
Expansive soils, 1-14 Basis of, 1-7
Freezing-thawing in, 1-23 to 1-27 SHOULDERS, 1-22
Frost effects, 1-14 to 1-15, 1-25, 1-26 Definition, 1-29
Highly organic, 1-15 Design criteria, 1-29
Placement considerations, 1-14 to 1-15 Overlay design considerations, 111-81 to 111-82,
Resilient modulus of, 1-13 to 1-15, 11-12 to 11-15, III-105, I I I - l l l , III-125, III-135, III-143,
11-16 HI-151, III-155
Resilient soils, 1-14 Tie bars in, 11-26
Subbase course design and, 1-16 Tied
Swelling soils in, 1-8, 11-33 to 11-35, 11-47 definition of, 11-26 to 11-27
Thaw-weakening effects, 1-25 to 1-27 load transfer calculations for, 11-26 to 11-27
ROAD OILING, 111-72 SKID-RESISTANCE
ROUGHNESS Of overlays, III-3
Functional evaluation of, 111-84 to 111-85 SLAB LENGTH
In Present Serviceability Index, 1-7 to 1-8 Jointed reinforced concrete pavements, 11-27 to
User costs and, 1-45 to 1-46 II-28
RUBBERIZED ASPHALT SEAL, 111-71 to 111-72 Prestressed concrete pavement, 1-65 to 11-66
RUBBLIZE AND COMPACT TECHNIQUE, SLAB-VOID DETECTION, 111-32, 111-35, 111-41 to
III-106 to III-107 111-45
RUTTING, 1-27 SLURRY SEAL, 111-72
Allowable, 11-12 SMOOTH WIRE MESH
In low-volume aggregate-surfaced road design, Development in slab, 1-21
11-72 to 11-77 SOIL(S) See ROADBED SOIL(S)
In overlay design procedures, 111-81 SOIL SUPPORT NUMBER, II-3
R-VALUE SOIL SUPPORT VALUE
Converting to resilient modulus, 1-14 Definitive test for, ix
STABILIZATION
SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS, 1-7 Flexible pavement base, 1-16, 1-17
SALVAGE VALUE, 1-43, 1-45 STAGE CONSTRUCTION
SAND SEAL, 111-72 Compounding of reliability in, 11-33, 11-44
10 Design of Pavement Structures

Cumulative traffic calculations in, II-6 SUBDRAINAGE

Design considerations, 1-12 Design, 111-68, 111-76 to 111-77
Flexible pavement, 11-33 In overlay design procedures, 111-81, 111-87 to
Reliability and, 1-63 III-88, 111-95, III-108, III-115, III-137,
Rigid pavement, 11-44 to 11-47 III-146, III-153
STEEL REINFORCEMENT Survey, 111-87 to 111-88
Allowable working stress, 11-28, 11-53, 11-56 SUBGRADE RESTRAINT
Bar/wire diameters, 11-29 In prestressed concrete pavements, 11-67
In CRCP, design variables of, 11-28 to II-II-29 SUBSEALING TECHNIQUES, 111-41, 111-66 to
Design nomograph for jointed reinforced concrete, 111-67, III-76
II-51, 11-52 SURFACE COURSE
Design procedure for CRCP, 11-51 to 11-62 Asphalt concrete, layer coefficients, 1-6, 11-17
Jointed pavement design variables, 11-27 to 11-28 Drainage, 1-28, 111-25, 111-26
Role of, 11-51 Flexible pavement, 1-20
Thermal coefficient, 11-29 Functional assessment for overlay design, 111-84
Transverse, 11-62 to 11-65 to 111-85
STEEL WORKING STRESS, 11-28 Nonoverlay rehabilitation of, 111-71 to 111-73,
STRESS-ABSORBING MEMBRANE 111-76
INTERLAYER, 111-72, 111-95 Thickness, 11-35
STRESS STATE SURFACE TREATMENTS, III-71 to 111-73, 111-76
Flexible pavement, 1-15 to 1-16 SWELLING SOILS
STRUCTURAL CAPACITY Effect on pavement serviceability, 1-8
Evaluation for overlays, III-85 to III-91 In flexible pavement structural design, 11-33 to II-35
Nondestructive deflection analysis of, 111-32, In rigid pavements, 11-47 to 11-48
III-35 to III-38
Remaining life evaluation of, 111-88 to 111-91 TEMPERATURE EFFECTS, 1-22 to 1-23 See also
STRUCTURAL NUMBER Freezing-Thawing, Frost heave
Asphalt concrete pavements, determination of, Asphalt concrete performance, 1-27
III-101 to III-104 Climactic zones, map of, 111-26 to 111-27
Flexible pavement design nomograph, II-31 to Concrete thermal coefficient, 11-29
II-32 Design temperature drop, 11-29
For rigid pavements, III-110 to III-111 Freezing index, 1-25
Role of, 1-6 Steel thermal coefficient, 11-29
STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE Thaw-weakening, 1-25 to 1-27
Definition of, 1-7 TENDONS
Functional performance vs in overlay design, In prestressed concrete pavement, 11-66
III-81 TERMINAL SERVICEABILITY INDEX
SUBBASE COURSE Definition of, 1-8
Drainage, 1-28, 111-25, III-26 Public acceptance in defining, 11-10
Flexible pavement TERMINOLOGY, 1-3, 1-4
as drainage layer, 1-16 Economic analysis, 1-42 to 1-44
layer coefficients for, 1-16 THAWING See Freezing-thawing
materials, 1-16 to 1-17 THAW-WEAKENING EFFECTS, 1-25 to 1-27
role of, 1-16 to 1-17 THERMAL COEFFICIENT
Friction factors, 11-28, 11-29 Concrete, 11-29
Granular, layer coefficient, 11-20 to 11-22 Steel, 11-29
Prestressed concrete pavement, 1-65 TIE BARS, 1-22
Rigid pavement, 1-21 Design procedure, 11-62 to 11-65
Sandy gravel, layer coefficient value, 1-6 Full-depth repairs, 111-62
Seasonal effects, 1-27 Placement in tied shoulders, 11-26
Subsealing repairs, 111-41, 111-66 to 111-67, TIME
111-76 Constraints, as design variable, II-5 to II-6
Thickness, 11-35 Cumulative ESALS vs , II-8
Index

Environmental serviceability loss vs , TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT COSTS,

11- 10, 11-11 1-42
And expansion joint installation, 111-70 TRIDEM AXLES, 1-10
Fatigue in prestressed concrete pavement, 11-66 TRUCK EQUIVALENCY FACTORS, 1-10
Interactive effects of, 1-8, 1-13 Truck weight information for, I-11 to 1-12
In life-cycle costing, 1-47 to 1-48
Value of, in economic analysis, 1-42, 1-43 UNDERCUTTING, III-62
TIRE INFLATION, 1-12 UNIT VALUE OF TIME, 1-42
TRAFFIC USER BENEFITS, 1-42 to 1-44, 1-46
Accident costs, 1-42, 1-46 Indirect, 1-50
Delays, cost of, 1-46 USER COSTS, 1-42, 1-44, 1-45 to 1-46
As design variable, II-6 to II-9
Estimating growth in, I-11 to 1-12 VALUE OF TRAVEL TIME, 1-42, 1-46
Evaluation of, 1-10 to 1-12 VEHICLE TRAVEL TIME, 1-42, 1-46
Mixed, converting to ESALs, 1-10
Reliability factors in estimating, 1-12 WELDED WIRE FABRIC
Scheduling repairs around, 111-63, 111-70 Allowable working stress, 11-28