CHAPTER 3

HIGHWAY PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL DESIGN

This chapter describes the application of design Finally, it is strongly recommended that the life-
procedures for both fle,l(ible and rigid highway pave- cycle cost economic a~alysis method described in P.art
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 p~vements (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 traftic (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 ttie 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
pavements permit both traffic and environmental loss 3.1.1 Determine Required Structural Number
of serviceability to be taken into account. If the de-
signer desires that only the serviceability loss due to Figure 3. 1 presents the nomograph recommended
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 igporcd.
The basic .._oncept 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 tor any environ- assu,nes all input is at average valt.~e,
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 ()r economic reasons. Thus, numerous strate- material, MR (Section 2.3.1), and
gies for original design thickness and subsequent (5) Lhe design serviceability loss, ilPSI = Po
rehabilitation may be developed. p1 (Section 2.2.1).

J/-3/
 ~
;::;
~SOD/ES:
~ 1 PSI ]

loglo[ 4.2 - 1.5 J

logl~lS = ZR*S0 + 9.36*log10 (SN+l) - 0.20 + + 2.32*logloMR - 8.07
1094
0 ·"0 + - - 5 1 9
(SNH) •

Tt_ ~ TL
-·~
c:~
Design Serviceability Loss, ~PSI ! /
_!! D
0 - ./'f'
>
·:; - ,..
,...~
99.9 c:r"'
we: ~

0 ;;;
~0 a.-= ~6
:a;o
~ -~
(/) a:

,.
bj
-l''
g' <D- -o:::!E ./

~
~ ~t!
[!:..
::::_ffr-.z
-8:
c;<t
<;-o '
Q)
..0 111
"0_2
<11 :::1
0-o
-

v~
v ~ ~
!-0
0
a: 0
Cl: 0 .,;.
"b al:::iE /
-·.
-,:J..J

~w
,.:; __.-.g/.... 4 •o- >-
·;: c
/
- r:: ,--. '-' Q)

·-::.a ... 0
~
E,.
·- <(
-;;
=
W;:
w ·rn
/

~
Q) / / I
0 90 w-oo a:
/,

~~
c:
(i; 05/
/0 1/j
: . c/ /~ 1
Example: 1.¥.:'. ~
~.0

W 11 : 5 x10 5 I
9 8
I
1
I
' 5
,
.
I
3 2
.,.~
:.,
R=95o/o OesiQn Structural Number, SN :;q·
::
so: 0.35 ~
M": 5000 psi ?
~
6PSI : 1.9
~
Sohotion: SN : 5.0 22
:!
:::.
Figure 3.1. Design Chart for Flexible Pavements Based on Using Mean Values for Each Input
~
""
 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
levd 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 ~onstruction bed .from frost penetration. T~is 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 alter·natives are to the need for future overlays, then the following proce-
be considered, it is· important jP check the constraint dure should be applied. It does require the plot of
. on mtnimum 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.
P9rtant 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) 113 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 mir.e 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-
procedute 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.~ 112 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 Desif?n of Pavement Stntctures

Tnhlt' 3.1. F.xample of Process Used to Predict the Performance Period of an Initial Pavement
Structure Considering Swelling and/or Frost Heave
---------------------------
Initial PSI 4.4
Maximum Possible Performance i•criod (ye11rs) IS

Design Serviceability I..oss, A PSI = p 6 - p 1 = ____

4_.4_-_2__:_.5c__=_l:....·..:..9_ _

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

Trial Total Serviceability Corresponding Allowable Corresponding
(1) Performance l..oss Due to Swelling Serviceability l..oss Cumulative Performance
Iteration Period and Frost Heave Due to Traffic Traffic Period
No. (years) APSisw,m APSITR (18-kip ESAL) (years)
1 13.0 0.73 1.17 2.0 X 106 6.3
2 9.7 0.63 1.27 2.3 X 106 7.2
3 8.5 0.56 1.34 2.6 X 106 8.2
-----
Column No. Description of Procedures
2 Estimated hythe designer (Step 2).
3 Using estim:,tted value lrom Column 2 with Figure 2.2, the total serviceability loss
due to swelling and frost h~ave is determined (Step 3).
4 Snhtract environmental serviceability loss (Column 3) from design total
serviceability loss to determine corresponding serviceability loss due to traffic .
.'i 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 .'i).
6 Using the traffic from Column .'i, estimate net performance period from Figure 2.1
(Srep 6).

smm d, the maximum structural n•1mher (determined Strp 4. Subtract this environmental serviceability
from Figure 3.1) that should be considered f\Jr swell- Joss (Step 3) from the desired total serviceability loss
ing/frost heave conditions is 4.4. An;;thing less than a (4.4 - 2.5 = l.9 is used in the ~xample) to establish
SN of 4.4 may be appropriate, so long a!> it does not the corresponding traffic serviceability lo-;s. Enter
violate the minimum performance period (Secti• result in Column 4.
2.1. I).
~PSI "PSlsw.FH
Strp 2. '·--lcct • · ial performance period th ·1
might he cxp~'dC'•Iuthll't the swelling/frost heave con-
Step 5. Use Figure 3.1 to estimate the all' vable
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 ; 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-
fnrrnance period will he.
plying the flexible pavement chart to estimate this
allowable traffic.
Step 3. lJ ~ing the graph of cumulative environ-
mental serviceability Joss versus time developt.'cl in Step 6. Estimate the corresponding year at which
Section 2.1.4 (Figure 2.2 is used as an example), esti- the cumulative I R-kip ESAL traffic (determined in
mate the corn·sponding total serviceability 1oM due to Step )) will hP rt'ached and enter in Column 6. This
swelling and frost heave (~PSisw,nr) that can he ex- should he accomplished with the aid of the cumu)l>tive
pected for tht~ trial period from Step 2, and enter in tn•ffic versus time plot developed in Sectioa 2. 1.2.
Column 3. (Figure 2. 1 is used as an example.)
Highway Paveme111 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 i's used to estimate the Minimum Thickness (inches)
performance period of the overlay and (2) any swell- Asphalt Aggt·egate
ing and/or frost heave losse&'""predicted after overlay Traffic, ESAL's Concrete Base
should restart and then progress from the point in time
when the overlay was placed. Less than 50,000 1.0 (or surface 4
treatment)
50,001-150,000 2.0 4
3.1.4 Selection of Layer Thicknesses 150,001-500,000 2.5 4
500,001-2,000,000 3.0 6
Once the design structural number (SN) for an ini- 2,000,001-7,000,000 3.5 6
tial pavement structure is determined, it is necessary Greater than 7,000,000 4.0 6
to identify a set o~'" 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, individuai 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-
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-
a 11 a2 , a 3 = layer coefficients representative pf ties may be large due to reductions in surface water
surface, base, and subbase entry.
courses, respectively (see Section
2.3.5),
actual thicknesses (in inches) 3.1.5 Layered Design Analysis
of surface, base, and s··bbase
courses, respectively, and It should be recognized that, for flexible pave-
= 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; Le., there are many combinations of layer thick- structural nuqiber 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 1/1:_ inch. When selecting appropriate values for differences between the computed structural numbers
11-36 Design of Pcvement StructureJ

... .. • " . ~::

±
SN 1 .. Surface Course

SN 2 "' • • • • • ttJ • D C) •

• '·'.o • 0

- ... ~ ~·
Base Course
SN 3 c
0 0
<:1
•• • • 6
Cl ..,
IJ
Cit • •
e;JC
.. ~0 oo ~. ..
D_ ~0
e>
•
e;;d_O
o
-
o
0
Subbase Course
.............. ,... 0 -c:
D3

Roadbed Course

1
SN
>
o• 1 ---
a,

SN* 1 = a 1o• 1 > S~J,

I)• >
SN
2 . SN• 1
2
a 2 m:<.

SN* 1 + SN* 2
-> SN 2

SF\1 3 - (SN* 1 + SN* 2 )

o·~ >

1) a, 0, m and SN are as defined in the tAxt and are minimum required values.

2) An 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 Determini"g Thicknesses of Layers Using a Lay~red Analysis Approach
~·
';~~'
~·;
Highway Pavement Structural Design l/-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 strengths 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 e\'aluating 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 identifitd, 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, 4uantifi~;d ir~
established based on cost effectiveness and minimum Section 2.4. 3, is used to correct the effecti vc
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 fot 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 tabk
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 :nust be defined in
distrt<SS 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, Ius 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 (E 88 )
values for each season. These valut;s, which were dis·
3.2.1 Develop Effective Modulus of cussed in Section 2.3.3, should be entered in Colum11
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 bt!
vided. This is accomplished using Table 3.2 and Fig- assigned for each season. For those unbound material:;
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 st.~grade reaction, k. An example of this the extreme conditions, values for Es 8 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,
e!al different factors besides the roadbed soil resilient the ratio of the subbase to the roadbed soil resilient
/l-38 Design of Pavement Structures

'Thble 3.2. 'Thble for Estimating Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction

Trial Subbase: T y p e - - - - - - - - - - Depth to Rigid Foundntion (feet) _ _ _ _ __

Thickness (inches) Proje~ted Slab Thickness (inches) _ _ _ _ __
Loss of Support, LS ____ _

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

k-Value (pci)
Roadbed Subbase Composite on Rigid Relative
Modulus, Modulus, k- Value (pci) Foundation Damage, Ur
Month MR (psi) E 88 (psi) (Fig. 3.3) (Fig. 3.4) (Fig. 3.5)'
I

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June
I

July

Aug. --
··-

Sept.
--

Oct.

Nov.

Dec. --

- Summation: :Eur =
Average: ur = -:Eur
n
=
Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (pci) = _ __
'Corrected for Loss of Support: k (pci) =---
Highway Pavement Structural De~·ign Jl-39

EKample:

0 58 = 6 inches

E 58 = 20,000 psi

MR = 7,000 psi

Solution: k.., = 400 pci

~~
I
1,000,000 t--
600,000 r--- r--.._ ""
!"':
I'-. ~
Composite Modulus of -
400,000 r--.:...
200,000
10(),000
b-
75,000 ~ '-
r--- ~ !'---. r--..
!'-- r-..... r---.: t---. t---.
Subbase Elastic
Modulus 1 ESB (psi)
"'1'-,"'
~
~ '"" ~"- ""-
~ ~ Subgrade Reaction 1
~ "'- ""- ~ ""-
'"'~
k 10 (pci)
~ [',. 1!Assumea Semi- -
-

""""'
!10,000 r- --. 8:: ~ 'r---.. r-.::: ~ t'--, ~ "-
"-
~ ~
infinite Subgrade
Depth)
30,000 t- -
r-- --r--- f-. r::::
.......
15,000 t::::: ~ r--... t': ~t--.. ~ ~ 1\ 1\: "- ':::: /~0ooo
....... ......
r--. t-- 1'--- r---:: ~ 1::::-.. ~ PS ::--.... 1'\. ~:'\I\:' I'\."'
" '~~ /000 0

-
":; ~ f'-. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
r--.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "' "~ '"~ ~"~ 6'00

""' "" ~""'f--K~o "'eo a> R" " ~ ~

I--
f'-. t" ~ ~ ~
"
t" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ "'" "- ~ ~
-~ ~ ';:::!>~.."' ~
"
~ "' "" """"~ '\' ""\~
""

f--
I I I I
--

Subbase Thickness, DSB (inches)

I I I i I' I I
r
I
"' " ~
~
'\
"\
"' "'"',_
"'
~ ~~
'\' ~"
1000 f-.

2000 1-
t--
18

-
- --- -
16

1-
14 12

r-- -..
10 8 6

""' ["'..
~
3000 1- t-- 1- '- 'r--.. ~ (/'-
woo 1- t-
7000 1-
10000
1'--
1~000 ~ 1--
.._
-- -- r-- t--
1-1---
r-- t--
r-- t--..
r-- t--..
r-- t--
r--....
r--..
~ I-...

!'---
-.......
"' v,..
""'-1'\:"' </
...,Q

r"."~..1
t=::: t-- f-. r- t- r-......
t--
-
16,000 t- I'--
20,000 .._r-- ['.._
t-- t-- t--- 1--- t-- r-::::: r- r-...... ~
t-- r-- t---. t--.. r- t'--- t'---
t- ~ r--... I'--
""t:--. --
~
"I'..

~"'-,
-
r\'

I--
~ ['--,.
...........
f-....' !'...... I"[" " ·f- 1--
-
"~
I--
Roadbed
Soil Resilient 1-- 1--1---
~
~
"" ""' """"I"
I-- Modulus, MR (psi)
-- 1-- ~" -- - -

f"-
Figure 3.3. ChaJ;t for Estimating Composite Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k 00 , 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.)
 ....
7-
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k 00 (pci)
~
Assuming Semi-infinite Subgrade Depth
I I V I
}~ /400
I 50 100 zoo .I

I
I
I

,_____
Subgrade Depth to Rigid
Foundation, DSG (ft.)
I I
I I I L
I I
I I I
I I I
1/
I
--
-l I I I ;'
L
.

1/

I l L II I / 1
J Example:

I v / L
v MR : 4000 psi
I I I DsG : 5 ft.
=
/ I I I I / v/ { k 00 2~0 pci
= 300 pci
v/v~
/ Solution: k

/
/
II I II I
I

i
i
/( _11 I 1
.L
v I / / /
~v 0 I I II / / /
/
~
---- ---------
/
v :/
~ _..v /_.//(a
II vII I / / /
v ~
I I V~/ v v
,....-
f-- ~ \:I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
/
I I
/
I
/
I
<0:
I
"'
~·
::
20,000 15,000 iO,OOO 5000 0 500 1000 1!500 2000 ~
?
Roadbed Soil ~esilient Modulus, MR (psi) Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (pci) ~
3
(Modi tied to account for presence of a"'
rigid foundation near surface) ~
2
Q
Figure 3.4. Chart to Modify Modulus of Subgrade Reaction to Consider Effects of Rigid Foundation Near Surface (within 10 feet)
~
"'
 Highway Pavemeflt Structural Design 11-41
1000

----
- 14

--- --
500 I

12
t-1- !'. -~---

Projected Slab
Thickness
(inches)
---
---- -----:
10
---..L

9
r

T-
.... ;;;;; -'-I
;;;;:::
-
--
-

------ ""'--
-- ~
-- ...... ......;.._
I --
....,
~ .........
......

~
----
1-1-i-f..,
8 1-- r-....
:--_
100 1---.i. r--... I"- ~ ~

- 7 r-..

-- -
(60 ) ........
~
-
-.. ........ ' '
50 I r---...
"""
--
.........
1---6 -........ .........
~

0
Q)
Ol
ro
E
ro
Projected Slab
o;;;.._
............ !--..
......... 1--...
r-.....
" ' 'I'..
"-....

"" "'
...............
"~--
Q)
>
·;::;
Thickness .............
ro
Q)
(inches) ............. ~'- .... ........
a: ...........
..........
~
"
'--,
10

5
-
"" '
"\.
'\
- - - - '\
\

- - \
\
- -

154f}
1 II I
10 50 100 500 1000 2000
Composite k-value (pel}

Figure 3.5. Chart for Estimating Relative Damage to Rigid l.._vements Based on Slab Thickness
and Underlying Support
 11-42 Design of Pavement Structures

1000 - ----t-.,1--
1-----t----1------t--··- -t-t-Hr------t--l--l--t-t---HH-lf----t---lf--+-+--Hn--1H----t

---
500 -
t - - - - - - - t----1---1- - - - - - ---t---- -- - - --
v -·-
.

/
/ /
t----,1----+---1·--- -

(170)
-- - t-----f---1-+-+--1--++++----

/
v I'
,...~-'
v

v /
?

u
!:?.

5 10 50 100 500 1000 2000

Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k lpcil

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

Thble 3.3. Example Application of Method for Estimating Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction

Trial Subbase: Type _ _ _ _G_r_an__u_l_ar_ _ __ Depth to Rigid l!oundation (feet) _ _ _5_.

Thickness (inches) ___6_ __ Projected Slab Thickness (inches) _ _ _9_ __
Loss of Support, LS _ _1_._0__

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

k-Value (pci)
Roadbed Subbase Composite on Rigid Relative
Modulus, Modulus, k-Value (pci) I<oundation Damage, u,
Month Ma (psi) Es 8 (psi) (Hg. 3.3) (Fig. 3.4) (li'ig. 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. I

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.

= 0 60 Summation: I:u, = 7.25

Ave rage.·ijr = I:u, = 7.25
n 12
Effective Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (pci) 540

Corrected for Loss of Support: k (pci) 170

il-44 IJesi~?n of Pavement Structures

modulus should not exceed 4 to prevent ;.m arti!'ici:1l 3.2.2 nctcnnim~ Rl'lJUirt>d Slab Thicktll'SS
condition.
The fourth step is to estimate the composite modu- Figure 3. 7 (in 2 segme11ts) presents the nomograph
lus of suhgrade 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-vaiue identified in the previous section. The
greater than 10 feet) and enter in Column 4. This is designer may theu select the optimum combination of
slab and subbase thicknesses based on economics and
accomplished with the aid of Figure 1.1. Note that the
other agency policy requirements. Generally, the layer
starting point in this chart is subbase thickness, Dsn.
thickness is rounded to the nearest inch, but the use of
lf the slab is placed directly on the suhgrade (i.e., no
controlled grade slip form pavers may permit 1/2-inch
subbase), the composite modulus of suhgrade react'on 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 hearing test and elastic graph include:
modulus of the roadbed soil:
(I) the estinwted future traffic, W IR (Section
2.1.2), for the pnrformance period,
k (2) the reliability, R (Section 2.1.3),
(1) the overall standard deviation, S0 (Section
2.1.3),
NOTE: The development of this relationship' is de- (4) design serviceability loss, !!PSI = p; - p,
scriberl as part of Volume 2, Appendix HH. (Section 2.2. I),
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 modulu<; of rupture, S'. (Section
2.1.4),
This step should be disregarded if the depth to a rigid
(7) load transfer coefficient, J (Section 2.4.2),
foundation is greater than I 0 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 suhgrade
reaction, as well as the depth to the rigid foundation.
3.2.3 Sta~e Construction
The values for each modified k-value should subse-
quently he recorded in Column 5 of 'H•hle 1.2.
Experience in some states ha:> shown that there may
The sixth step in the process is to estimate the be a practical maximum performance period (Section
thit::kness 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, u,, 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 1.2. 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 rt"liability, the ovewll 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 1.6 provides the chart tor correctiPg desired, the individual reliability for each stage must
the effective modulus of subgrade reaction hased on he (0.95) 112 or 97.5 percent.
the loss of support factor, LS, determined in Section To evaluate ~econdary 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 Ill
final design k-value. of this Guide which addresses the def.ign for pavement
 ,.,.f ..:~-· j
~ SCKNI!S: ::;;
s~ • ~ &o. 75 _ 1.132] ""~
;::,..

109towis • 'Jt*S0 + 7.35*1og10 (Dt1l - 0.06 + - - - - - - - + (4.~.32ptl*109tol [ 18.42 ]

"":?
1.624*107 "'
~
:::
l + ---............
(Dtl)8.46 215.63*Jl~.75 - CEcfkl0.25J ;:;;
=.
~
~
,..,
~
Can crete Elostlt ~. Ec ( trf' P11) §..
~

TL \ TL "'"'
~-
;::

1200
--
t il
I A\
.s I 4.5 "c.
u

-•.
u
(I) I 3.5 '
c:

•...
-•
'C)
:I
u

, I
Q.
!u.

;,
:I 0
0:: u
• '0.

2 .,c:
·c;
... -l
0
r.

800 500 100 50 10

500
•...
u
-
u
c
~
6
u
Effective Modulus of Subgrode s• Eaomple:
~
Reaction, k (pci)
k = 72 pci So = 0.29
Ec = 5 1 psi to6 R: 95% (Z 11 : ·1.645)
s1c: 6SO psi 6 PSI : 4.2 - 2.S : I. 7
J : 3.2 W : 5J • 106 (18 kip ESAL)
18
cd = 1.0 Solution: 0=10.0 inchu (nearest
holt -inch, from .. CJIII8nf 2 )
:;::
"""
-'-'!
Figure 3.7. Design Chart for Rigid Pavement Based on Using Mean Values for Each Input Variable (Segment 1)
11-46 Desif?n of Pavpment Structurps

Design Slab Thickness, D (inches)

7 [7/ v/ v/
'
v. v/
[7/ [7/ v/ /
/ / v/ v/
-
v
v/v 1//v/ ~
---
/ / /
v/ '/v v/ v l7 v
/
v/v/VVI/V v 7
v/v/'/1/l/ l/ / / v /
30 ~ ~000v,o/'/v-v ~
/ / / v /
v y
.;
/ v/ / / // / / / /

~
40
.3"'
~
:a
.
/ vv/
v/ v/.
v/
/ / /
v v [7 [7
/
/ v
0
.
/ [/ v/ / / / 7
v
!10 .~
>
....
•
Cl)
0
0 7/~ v/ v
v v v v 1/
/ /
50 c
..
0
·as
/ v [7/v v v7 v
70
0

v/ v v' v v 1/ /
/

v/ ,
10 v / /

90
111 II 1
.I .05

100

NOTE• Application of reliability

in this chart requires
the use Clf mean values
lor all the Input variables.

--------------------r------------------------------TL

99.9

Reliability, R ( 0/ol

Figure 3. 7. Continued-Design Chart for Rigid Pavement.••; Based on Using Mean Values for
Each Input Variable (Segment 2)
Highway Pavemefll Structural Design /1-47

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 ofthis iterative process is to determine when
the application of other rehabilitation methods that the combined serviceability loss due to traffiq 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 tor
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 Roadbed Swelling and Frost .Heave tnended is that derived for conditions assuming no
swelling or frost heave. Referring to the example proh-
The approach to considering the effects of swelling lefQ 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 consi~rations because of their 2.1.1).
potential effect on the rate of serviceability loss. It is important tQ 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 effeclive 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 0.90 112 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 icc 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 efft:ctive 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 e~en eliminates the thaw-weakening that may occur Step 3. Using the gr~ph of cumulative environ-
in tile 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 (~PSisw.FH) that can be expected fnr 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 serviceapility
struction strategies because of the planned future ne~d loss (Step 3) from the desired total serviceability loss
for rehabilitation. In the stage construction approach, (4.2- 2.5 = 1.7usedintheexample)toestablishthe
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-
sired analysis period is then identified. The difference
~PSITR = ~PSI - ~PSisw.FH

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
ll-48 nesign of Pavement Stmct11res

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

Sinh Thickness (inches) 9.5

Mnxinmm Possible Performance Period (yenrs) 20

4.2 - 2.5 = 1.7
Design Serviceability Loss, L\ PSI = p; - p, = ----- ----
(2) (3) f4) (5) (6)
Trial Total Servict>ability Corresponding Allowabie Corre.<;ponding
(l) J•erformance Loss Due to Swelling Serviceability Loss Cumalative Performance
Iteration lleriod and Frost Heave Oue to Traffic Traffic Period
No. (years) i\PSisw,Fn £\PSlm (18-kip ESAL) (years)
·----- ---- ------------6
l 14.0 0.75 0.95 3. I X 10 9.6
2 11.8 Q.69 1.01 3.3 X J06 10.2·
6
3 11.0 0.67 1.03 3.4 X 10 10.4
Column No. l>c!"rription of Procedures
2 Estimated by the designer (Step 2).
3 Using estimated value from Column 2 with Figure 2.2, the total serviceability loss
due to swelling and frost heave is determined (Step ~).
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 constan~ (except for use of traffic
serviceability loss from Column 4) and a;Jplying the chart in revene (Step 5).
6 Using the traffic from Column .'i. estimat~ net performance period from Figure 2. I
(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 reliahility, effective modulus of sub- any subsequent overlays. The major differences in ac-
grade reaction, ell..:., when applying the rigid pave- tual application are that (I) 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 <orresponding year at which ing and/or frost heave bsses predicted after overlay
the cumulative 18-kip ESAL traffic (determined in shculd restart and then progress from the point when
Step 5) will he 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. I. 2.
(Figure 2.1 is used as an example.) 3.3 RIGID PAVEMENT JOINT DESIGN

Step 7. Compare the trinl perfermance 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 r.ign of joints in both jointed and continuous
iieration (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 slah thickness. In the examplP-, con-
vergence was reached after three iterations and the Joints are plac:ed in concrete pavements to permit
predicted performance period is about 10.5 years. expansion and contraction of the pavement, thereby
Highway Pavement Structural Design /J-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 when: 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 ut intersections.
The spacing between construction joints is gener~
(l) 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 Geometry
( 1) reduced det1ection 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 con9itions 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 capapilities. 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 Dimensio11s. 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 Dime~sions." The depth
control cracking. Local expenence 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 1/4 of the
rough guide, the joint spacing (in feet) fpr plain con- slab thickness, and longitudinal joints 113 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-in.ch 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 Desil{n of 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-
chl!nge. mately. The joint width must account for the move-
ment plus the allowable residual strain in the joint
sealant, 'and may he computed by the following:
3.3.3 Joint Sealant Dimensions

The joint sealant dimension guidelines are dis-

= CL(ac X DT 0 + Z) X lOO
cussed for each joint type in the following sections.
s

Contraction Joints. Joint movement and the ca- where

pabilities of the sealant material must be optimized. In
general, the quality ofthe joint sealant material should
increase as the expected joint movement incre:tses. ,AL = the joint opening caused by temperature
Increased joint movement can be the result of longer changes and drying shrinkage of the
slab length, higher temperature change, and/or higher PCC, in.,
concrete thermal coefficient. S = allowable strain of joint sealant material.
Joint movement in pavement-; 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 suhgrade). Note that conservative value,
because of subgrade friction and end restraints, ac = 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 .lin.,
the sealant re~ervoir must have the proper shape factor L = joint spacing, in.,
(depth-to-width ratio). Within the practical limitations DT 0 = the temperature range, oF, 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 stabili:r.ed
face a minimum of 1/s 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
to width of sealant ratio should be within a range .of should be placed 1/s to 112 inch below the surface of the
I to 11h, with a minimum depth of 3/s and 1h 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 temp,~rature. Thus, the joint> 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 he 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 !llay 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 sljib contractions, and (2) calculations for determining the required longitudinal
frictional resistance from the underlying material. As steer perceutage. A separate worksheet, presented in
temperature drops or moisture content decreases, the Table 3.6, is provided for design revisions. Although
slab tends to coptract. 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
(I) concrete indirect tensile strength, f1
strength of the concrete, a era~ 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, ac
would result in excessive crack width. (Section 2.5.2),
Because the longitudinal Sleel reinforcement re- (4) reinforcing bar or wire diameter, <PI
quirements between jointed reinforced (JRCP) and (Section 2.5.2),
continuously reinforced concrete pavement (CRCP) (5) steel thermal coefficient, a. (Section 2.5.2),
are significantly different, the reinforc~::ment designs and
are treated separately. It should be recognized, how- (6) design temperature drop, DT 0
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 Criteri0;. In addition to the inputs re-
(1) slab length, L (Section 2.5.1), quired for the design of longitudinal r~~nforcing steel,
(2) steel working stress, f. (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 JRCf:l.
Normally for joint spacing, less than 15 teet 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
ll-52 Desil{n of -,avement Structures

NOMOGRAPH SOLVES, P1 = ir. l( 100

Tl,..

,
....
G)

J
0"
G)
a:
-- - u..
.:
-cG)

-
u 70
....u 0 E
G) 60
u e0 ·u;
_J
1.0
1.5
If
c
0
-c
·a;
50
.X

-"'"'
-.,
.c
1::1'
c
_J
25
+::
u
;t
~a:

~~0
40

..."'
G)
U>
.a
0
....c U>
u 1::1'
u; u.... c
:.;:
~
20 ....
0
~
o;
G)
u;
10 10

Example:
L = 36ft.
F = 1.5
f 5 = 30,000 psi

Solution:
P5 = .085%

Figure 3.8. Reinforcement Design Chart for Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavements
Highway Pavement Strucwral Design J/-53

Table 3.5. Worksheet for Longitudinal Reinforcement Design

DESIGN INI>U'l'S
Input Variable Value Input Variable Value
Reinforcing Bar/Wire Diameter, Thermal Coefficient Ratio,
<1> (inches) a..fa.c (in./in.)

Concrete Shdnkage, Design Temperature Drop,

Z (in./in.) DTL) (°F)
Concrete Tensile Strength, ·Wheel Load'
Stress ,
f, (psi) Ow (psi):

DESIGN CRITERIA ANI> REQUIRED STEEL PERCENTAGE

Crack Allowable Crack Allowable Steel
Spacing, x Width, CWmax Stress, (0 8 )max
(feet) (inches) (ksi)
Max. 8.0
Value of Limiting Criteria
Min. 3.5
Minimum Reyuired Steel
Percentage
Maximum Allowable Steel
Percentage
*Enter the largest percentage across line.
**If Pmax < P111 ; 0 , then reinforcement criteria are in contlict, design not leasible.

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 permanen( 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 allowabk 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 prt:dicted 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 lhble 3.7 are tor the Grade 60 steel (meeting ASTM
percentage or smaller diameter reinforcing A 615 specifications) recommended tor longitudinal
bars. reinforcement in CRC pavements (guidance for deter-
(3) Limiting criteria placed on steel stress are to mination of allowable steel stress tor other types of
guard agu1nst ste~l 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 lhble 3.5.
ultimate tensile strength is set. The conven-
tional limit on Figure 3.9 steel stress is 75 Desigu 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:
1/-54 Design of Pavement Structures

Table 3.6. Worksheet for Revised Longitudinal Reinforcement D~sign

Change in Value from PreYious Trial

Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial
Parameter 2 3 4 5 6
------- -----~

2
Reinforcing Bar/Wire Diameter,
<1> (inches)

Concrete Shrinkage,
Z (ln./in.)
---
2
Concrete Tensile Strength,
f1 (psi),
Wheel Load Stress,
Ow (psi)

1
Design Temperature Drop,
DT 0 (°F)
Thermal Coefficient Ratio,
a..tr~.c

Allowable Crack Width Criterion,

cw max (inches)
-·-
Allowable Ste<"l Stress Criterion,
( o,)max (ksi)
--------
Required Steel % for ,min.
Crack Spacing max.
Minimum Required Steel %
for Crack Width
Minimum Required Steel %
,. for Steel Stress
'
---- -
Minimum % Reinforcement, '
'
' Pm,in

Maximum % Reinforcement,
Pmax
-------
1
Change in this parameter will affect crack width criterion.
2 Change in this parameter will affect steel stress criterion.
Highway Pavement Structural Design J/-55

13 600

WHEEL LOAD EFFECTIVE

MAGNITUDE MODULUS OF
(POUNDS) SUBGRADE
12 REACTION 550

10 450 ·-
1/)

~
!/)
Q)
.c.
u
c
b "
<J)
(/)
0
9 400 ~
vi
(/)
(/)
Ql
c ~
-" Vl
u cQ)
E 1--
1--
.0 -c
Ctl cc
0
Vi 8 350 ..-J
c:
Ol
w
<ll
iii ..c
0
<ll
s
7 300

Figure 3.9. Chart for Estimating Wheel Load Tensile Stress

11-56 Design of Pavement Str~rtrrres

Thble 3.7. Allowable Steel WorkinJ! Stress, = maximum r~quired number of

ksi (10) reinforcing ban: or wires,
= minimum required percent steel,
Indirect Tensile
Strength of Concrete
Reinforcing Bar Size• = maximum requirl'!d percent steel,
='total width of pavemem section (inches),
at 28 days, psi No.4 No.5 No.6
= thickness of concrete layer (inches), and
300 (or less) 65 57 54 = reinforcing bar or wire diameter
400 67 60 55 (inches), which mlly 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 adjustment'! may he made using the ing the total number of reinforcing bars or wires in the
wire diameter to har diameter. final design section, Noesign• such that N 0 ";~" is a
whole integer number between Nmin ~nd 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 st'!el 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 'Thble 1.5
Design Example. The following example is pro-
Step 2. If P"'"' is greater than or equal to Pmin,
vided to demonstrate the CRCP longitudinal rein-
f.O f<' Slt"p :l. If P.,.. is lt"SS than pmin. then
f<'rcement desi_!!n procedme. Two trial designs are
(I) Review the design inputs and decide which evaluated: the first considers ~/R-inch (No. 5) reinforc-
input to revise. ing bars and the second trial design examines ~/4 in cit
(2) Indicate the revised design inputs in the work- (No. 6) bars. Below are the input rt>quirements se-
sheet in Thble 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 Thbles 3.R and 3.9.
in Table 3.6. Check to see if the ~evised inputs
affect the subbase and slab thickness design. It (I) Concrete tensile strength, f,: 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-
(1) 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 ir..!in. (This
(4) If P'""' is greater than or equa I 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 Thble 3.6 for addi- (3) Whee! load stress, ow: 230 psi. (This is based
tional trials. on the earlier slab thickness design example,
9.5-inch slab with a modulus ofsqbgrade 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 coefficit:nt to that of
Portland Cement Concrete, a,/ac: 1.32 (FQr
Nmin = 0.01273 X P.,; 0 X Ws X D/f!'/ 2 , and steel, the thermal coefficient is 5 X 10- 6 in./
in./ISoF. (See Section 2.5.2). Assume lime-
N'""' = 0.01271 X Pmax X Ws X D/rll/ 2 stone coarse aggregate in concrete, therefore,
the thermal coefficient is 3.8 X 10- 6 in./in./
where or. (See Table 2.9.)
(5) Design temperature drop, DT n: 55 °F. (As-
Nmin ·- minimum required number of reinforcing sume high temperature is 7.';°F and low is
bars or wires, 20°F.)
Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-57

Crock, Spacing, X (ft.)

~
0 o"' ...
0
Ul
0
til
0
~o=i\i
......
o
0 ooo !lD
0

__ - •..J...,,_ _ _ Ll--4,~-CX-s...L/_c....~,R~.-o_t..J.

1
1_"--.LI-..J.......LI--L...L.I ..&. J ..J.l..J

0
Lu.,.,.;, u,,,.;,l..1J
•.,,
()(~-
j...
:>
,,.
Q

11 ~ 'J., ~ (J)

g~g
0
<
Cl
Cll

XI
II

-- --
+
:-
01
N

+
§I~
- -oj-PI 0
1\)
o-

-- --
,.
0

,.
~
.._,
0

-- ~~~
+
"l)

~
en0
+

Tensile Stress Due to W!'eel Lood, O"w (psi)

II II I Ill Ylll
illl--1\)1\)1\) -- -
)C

+
:-
~ ~ 8 ~g

--
0 U1
0 ,.
---------------~--------------·---------~ 8N
... ..... +

--
Ul CD
0 0 ~
8 0 0 8 :....,
cD
'$,.

I I I I !'\)

Concrete Tensile Stren(,lth at 28 Days, t t (pai) iii

I
I I
Percent Steel, p
I I
I
~ u. i7l :..... i»

Figure 3.10. l~ercent of Longitudinal Reinfot·cemcnt to Satisfy Crack Spacing Criteria

11-58 Design of Pavement Stmctur-es

Cta ck Width I CW (in.)

·o 0 0 0 0 ·o b 0 0
N 1.11 ~ (]I • 0'1 ....J (l) <D 0
L __ _____, I I I I I I _._j_.J.l-IJ
Bar Di:'lmeter, <I> {in.)
I I I
.::::::
N
~~
co .l>
z0
3
--------------------------~--------------------r_.
0
.0
.....
c
~
-::T

U>
~
<
~

Tensile Stress Due to Wheel Load, Cfw (psi)

"' (')

~
I coI I I I I I I I \1 I I N N N
II
N 0'1 0 ~ co
0 0 0 0 0 0

- ~. ~~:
~
9
~
(/)
0
q 0 c
\\ 0
0

\
1:
0
1.0
U1 N 1.110 "
-·
0 U1 ~.~~-.....6
~
0~,:..
01 "' ..,0 .., "'
:::-e
0
"' "' "
\
)C (11

__....---....
-
UJ

r + )C
...------.._

----
\J
~

.l> -e-
.....____.,
(11
(11
N
N
Col'lcrete Tensi I e Strength, ft lpsi) 0
.t> U1 0'1. ....J co
o o o/ o o
0 0 0 0 0

Percent Steel , p
~-· -
(,
I
en
I u,
~ i1l ..j

Fi~ure 3.11. Minimum Percen~ Lonl(itudinal ReinforcE'mE'nt to Satisfy Crnck Width Criterion
Highway Pavement Structural Design

1\1 0 ID CD --1
0 0 0 0 0 0

uJLLJJ j_J_l
Undesirable 1
-L---.JL----l-,__J__ _L_ _L__ _L_ _L _ __l__ _ __L_ _ __j

Design Temperature Drop, DT0 (°F)

m
--101VI

-0'1-l:>
8 0101 .a
..,
z
0
3
0

0
'0
=r
(.f)
0
<
(II
(I)

Concrete Shrinkage at 28 Days, 2 (in/in)

- .rm
888
000
CDOll\l
....----.-..
+
IJ)Q

II

~
-,J

g~q
(JJ
0
0
......__.....
(JJ ----=-----
+
o-w
Tensile Stress Due to Wheel Load,

I I 1/1 I
(psi)
)C
....----.-..
~
-,o
0
oo ::-i

0'1 N
1\1
VI
0
+ ~

0 J>
0 0 0 0
9
~
0

---)~-r=i
1\)
0 Ul
N )C
......__..... ,......-:......
0 +
~
CD 0 .....
Concrete Tensile Strength, f t (psi)
I I 17 I I I I I
)C
~

......---....
0
0 -
......__.....
-..j CD
+
""0 ~
0
0
0
0
......__..... 0
1\)
I.D
........
~

00 IS)

Percent Steel, P
q
~q
m
IJ) - N 0
0 - ..... Ill
c:
0
II

01
. II

0
0

II

:::1 01
0
N
VI 0 01 01
-..j
0 0 01
"U
II
'0
Ill
-· '0
Ill
0
-l:>
0
, 7C'
Ill

~
J>
-..j

0~

Figure 3.12. Minimum Percent Longitudinal Reinforcement to Satisfy Steel Stress Criteria
11-60 DPsign of Pm•pment Structure.~

Thbfe 3.8. Example Applicatiowt of Worksheet for Longitudinal Reinforcement Dtsign

DESIGN INPUTS
---·-------- -
Input Variable Value Input Variable Value
Reinforcing Bar/Wire Diameter, Thermal Coefficient Ratio,
5 /R (No. 5) 1.32
<!l (inches) a.lac (in./in.)
Concrete Shrinkage, Design Temperature Drop,
Z (in./in.)
0.0004 DT 0 (°F)
55
--
Concrete Tensile Strength, Wheel Load Stress,
550 230
f, (psi) Ow (psi)

DESIGN CRITERIA AND REQUIRED STEEL PERCENTAGE

- --
Crack Allowable Crack Allowable Steel Design
Spacing, i Width, CW max Stress, (a 5 )max Steel
(feet) (inches) (ksi) Runge**
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%
Percentage Pma.

"'Enter the largest percentage across line ..

.. If P,;.. < Pmln• then reinforcement criteria are in conflict, design not feasihle.
, Highway Pavement Structural Design 11-61

Table 3.9. Example Application of Worksheet for Revised Longitudinal Reinforcem~nt Design

Change in Value from Previous Trial

Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial
Parameter 2 3 4 5 6
2
Reinforcing Bar/Wire Diameter, 3 /4 (No. 6)
4> (inches)
Concrete Shrinkage,
0.0004
Z (in./in.)
2
Concrete Tensile Strength-:"'
550
f 1 (psi)
Wheel Load Stress,
230
Ow (psi)

1
Design Temperature Drop,
550
DT D (°F)
Thermal Coefficient Ratio,
1.32
Us/ a.c
Allowable Crack Width Criterion,
0.04
CW 11.,x (inches)
Allowable Steel Stress Criterion,
57
(o.)n"x (ksi)
Required Steel % for min. <0.04%
Crack Spacing max. 0.57%
Minimam Required Steel %
0.43%
for Crack Width
Minimam Required Steel %
0.47%
fur Steel Stress
Mininnm % Reinforcement,
0.47%
Pmiu
·-
Maxi1111m % Reinforcement,
0.57%
Pmax
1
Change in this parameter will affect crack width criterion.
2
Change in this parameter will affect steel stress criterion.
11-62 Design nf Pflvement Structures

The limiting criteria corre~ponding to these design over the other. Thus, in this <;ase, the selection should
conditions are as follows: he based on economics and/or ease of construction.
(I) Allowable crack width, CW: 0.04 inch for both
trial designs. (See Section 3.3.2, "Continu-
3.4.3 Transverse Reinforc~ment
ously Reinforced Concrete Pavements; Limit-
ing Criteria.")
Transverse steel is included in either jointed or
(2) Allowable steel stress, o,: 62 ksi for SfR-inch
continuous pavemePts for conditions where soil vol-
bars (Trial 1) and 57 ksi for :114-inch bars. (See
ume changes (due to changes in either temperature or
·n.ble 3. 7 using tensile strength of 550 psi.)
moisture) can result in longitudinal cracking. Steel
Application of the desi,~n nomographs in Figures reinforcement will prevent the longitudinal cracks
3.10, 3.1 J, and 3.12 yields the following limits on from opening excessively, thereby maintaining maxi-
c;teel perc('ntage for the two trial designs: mum load transfer and minimizing water entry.
If transverse reinforcement and/or tic bars are
desired, then the information collected under Sec-
Trial Design 1: Pmin = 0.43%, Pm•x = 0.51% tion 2.5.1, "Reinfmcement Variables for Jointed Re-
Trial Design 2: Pmin = 0.47%, P111. . = 0.57% inforced Concrete Pavements," is applicable. In this
case, the "slab length" should be con~idered as the
distance between free longitudinal edg~s. If tie bars
The range (Nrnin to Nma•) 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 D('.'lign 1 (No. 5 bars): Nrnin = 19.2,
ing between reintorcing bars as follows:
Nmax 22.7
Trial Design 2 (No. 6 bars): Nmin = 14.6, y
Nmax = 17.6

where
Using twenty No. 5 bars for Trial 1 (P = 0 45%) "''d
fifteen No. 6 bars for Trial 2 (P = 0.48% ), the longi- Y =
transverse steel spacing (inches),
tu6nal reinforcing bar spacings would be 7.2 and A, =
.:ross-sectional area of transverse
9.6 inches, respectively. The predicted crack spacing, reinforcing ·steel (in. 2 ),
crack width, and steel stress for these two t~ial designs P1 percent trl!nsverse steel, and
are: D = slab thickness (inches).

Trial Design l Trial Design 2 Figures 3. 13 and 3. 14 may be used to detennine

Predicted (20 No. 5 Bars, (15 No. 6 Bars, · the tie bar spacing for 1/z- and ~IR-diamete• defo1med
Response p = 0.45%) p = 0.48%) bars, respectively. The designer enters the figUJe on
the horizontal with the distance to the closest free
Crack Spacing, edge axis and proceeds vertically to the pavement
x (feet) 4.1 4.6 thickness obtained from Section 3.2.2, "Dctennine
Crack Width, Required Slah Thickness." From the pavement hick-
CW (inches) o.o:H 0.012 ness, move hori1.ontally and read the tie bar sptcing
Steel Stress, from the vertical scale. These nomographs are tased
o, (ksi) 60 55 on Grade 40 steel and a subgrade friction fact•r of
·------- -------- - - - - - - - - - - - -
1.5.
Note that since steel stress decreases from a lnaxi-
Inspection of these result~; indicates that there is no mum near the center of the slab (between tlu· free
~ignificantdifference in the predicted response of edges) to 1:ero at the free edges, the required mininum
these two designs such that one should be selected tic liar spacing increases. Thus. in ordeno desi1n the
Highway Pavement Structural Design /l-63

48

36
Slab
"'
Ql Thickness
.r:. (inches)
u
.C::
Ol
c
u
(Q
c.
(J)
-
~
24
(Q
(l)
Ql
f.=
E
:;)
E
x
(Q
~

12

0
0 10 20 30 40

D1slilnce to Closest Free Edge (feet)

Example: Distance from free edge 24 ft.

D =lOin.

Answer: Spacing " 16 in.

Figure 3.13. Recommended Maximum Tie Bar Spacings for PCC Pavements Assuming
1h-inch Diameter Tie Bars, Grade 40 Steel, and Subgrade Friction Factor of 1.5
11-64 Desil(ll of Pavrmellt StructurPs

I
Sracings greater than 48" n'ot recommen< 'eel

Slab
Thickness
!inches)

36

"'
Q>
.c
u
.S
Cl
c
u
ct1
~
(/)
~ 24
~
.!!!
t-
E
::)

s
)(
ct1
~

12

0
0 10 20 30 40

Distance to Closest Free Edge (feet l

Example: Distance from free edge 24 ft

0 10 in

Answer: Spacing 24 in

Figure 3.14. Recol'lmended Maximum Tie Bar Spacings for PCC Pavements Assuming
5fs·inch Diameter Tie Bars, Grade 40 Steel, and Subgrade Friction of 1.5
 Highway Pavement Structural Design /1-65

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 I'AVEMENT 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 pwcedure can be pr~­ 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 essenti~y 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 clue 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 9f 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 pn. viously 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-
 Jl-66
JJrsiRn nf Pm·rmrnt Structr/1'1'5

tJde of the required force. (2) The number of, and the dons. respectively. The allowable stress in the tendon
fl)tal cost for, transverse joints is inversely propor- is sd 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 baseJ
o.1ly on the initial cost, but should also inclwle an
3.5.5 Fatigue
e.< timate of the maintenance cost over the life of the
facility. Generally, a compromise must be sought he-
tween these two factors. Based on PCP projects built Since very lit!le data exists for the relationship
between number of load repetitions and design re-
to date, a pavemeut length on the order of 400 feet
quirements, it is r~commended the designer use con-
appears to strike a reasonable balance between these
senative load repetition factors at the present time.
two constraints. Slabs as long as 760 feet in length
This is supported by the ohse;vation that little advance
have been huilt 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 fe•.v additional load repeti-
cVt!r, these are exceptions.
tions to go from a few initial signs of dist;ess to coin-
plete failure.
3.!i.3 Magniturle of Prestress

The magnitude of the longitudinal and transverse 3.5.6 PCP Structural Design
pn:stress must be great enough to provide sufficient
co npressive, 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
pa·;sage of a load. Many factors must be taken into the greater the prestress level, the thinner the pave-
act:ount to assure that the desired prestress level is ment; however, full potential cannot b~ recognized
obtained including the magnitude of the frictional tc- since :~dequate thid. ness must he 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
(l) Select a pavement thickness using the criteria
pa·tement.
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 r~­ (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
trr: nsversely. Step l 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
tb~ following formula:
The main factors governing tendon spacing are
tendon size, magnitude of design prestress; allowable
ccncrete bearing stress at the tendon anchorages, and
pr rmissible tendon anchoring stress. Although bar
ar·d 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 transvnse ten- Y, = spacing of tendons (in.),
Highway Pavement Strucwml Design 11-67

f1 =
allowable working strel>S in tendon
(psi),
Ar cross-sectional area of tendon (in. 2 ),
whert
D selected pavement thickness (in.),
and
fsR maximum subgradc restraint stress (psi),
oP = prestress level at end from Step 4.
~l 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 b~:en determined more on the basis of subgrude 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- Prestre!iS Lo!ises. ractors contributing to loss of
carrying considerations. This procedure has resulted prestress include: (I) 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 conerete 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. device.>; (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 lO 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 lite of the pavement.
when the pavement is decreasing in length. Prestress losses tor pretensionc;d and post-
The magnitude of the restraint stresses is a function tc;nsioned PCP are g~nerally expressed as a stress loss
of the coefficient of subgrade friction and the dimen- in the tendons. Therefore, the prestress applied to the
sions 4>f the slab, and is at maximum at the midlength pavement by means of th,e tendons must be· increased
and midwidth of the &lab. 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.