AXLE LOAD SURVEY

A Case Study, BENGHAZI LIBYA -

By ABDELSALAM M. ELJARM
B.Sc. (C. Eng.), M. Eng., MIHT
(Department of civil engineering –university of Benghazi -Libya)

1.0 ABSTRACT
This paper describes the data collection, analysis and recommendation for the
axle load survey conducted by the Municipality of Benghazi, Libya to obtain a firm
basis for the design of the new pavements and also to assess the residual life time for
the existing roads.
From the study, it is snown that the loads imposed by individual vehicles are
very high when compared with other countries in the Middle East and in Britain.
The analysis has shown that goods vehicles carrying cement and other
construction materials cause a substantial part of the problem.
If no steps are taken to limit the use of excessively heavily laden vehicles, the
construttion of very thick and hence expensive pavements would be required and ma
intenance exoenditure would also be expected to be high.
It is recommended that steps should be taken to control the weight of goods vehicles
rather than to design pavements to resist the existing load by installing a weigh-
bridge on roads and also more general control through legislation should be enforced
as soon as possible and this should limit the axle load and gross weights of all
vehicles using the public highway and control the types of vehicles imported.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
22 General
The extensive programme of construction works in Benghazi-Libya has
promted the Municipality to undertake surveys to determine the actual loads being
applied to the city highways to obtain a firm basis for a review of the pavement
design for the Benghazi Third Ring Road.
An Axle Load Survey was conducted on the main radial roads and at the
harbour at Benghazi. It should be emphasised that this study was of a limited extent
aimed at establishing a realistic present-day axle load value per heavy goods vehicle
for use in a review of the design of the pavement for the Third Ring Road.

2.2. Background to Highway Pavement Design

Traditional highway pavement is composed of materials which deflect under the
load from each wheel which passes over them. Repetitions of millions of loads
eventually cause a “fatigue failure’ of the pavement or subgrade which supports the
pavement. A “fatigue failure’ occurs when a structure fails under many repetition of a
load which it can easily carry for a single application. Where failure occurs in this
form, the number of times a load can be carried usually decreases as the size of the
load increases. In the cases of highway pavements, research throughout the world has
been based upon a standard 8 tons axle load, and it has been shown that, if a
particular pavement can carry N of such standard axle loads, the number of
repetitions s of any other axle load can be found from the formula
(W )P
n=N
w
“P” is a power factor and has been found to vary, but is taken for the purpuses of this
report as 4.55.
"n" is the number of repetitions of an axle load w.
“N’ is the known number of repetitions of a standard axle load W.
The above can be illustrated by an example:
If an 8 tons axle load can be carried by a particular pavement 100 million times
before failure, the number of repetitions of a 10 tons axle load before failure occurs
should be:
4 .55
8
n=100×106 =36 . 23×106 rebeitions
10
It can be seen from this exampl.e that each pass of a 10 tons axle load is equivalent to

100
2.76
36 .23
passes of an 8 tons axle.
It is said, therefore, that the 10 tons axle is equivalent to 2.76 standard 8 tons.axles, or
that the 10 tons axle is 2.76 Equivalent Standard Axles. (ESA).
In this report the term “damaging effect” is used since this term is commonly used in
research literature on this subject. Thus the damaging effect of a 10 tons axle is 2.76
times that of an 3 tons axle or 2.76 ESA. The leading for which a pavement is
designed is defined interms of the number of standard axles which it is estimated will
pass over the pavement during its design life.
The estimate of the number of standard axles is made by first estimating the
number of axles in each of a number of weight ranges which will use the highway
each day. Then for each weightrange, the number of vehicles is multiplied by the
appropriate damaging power for that range. The totals thus obtained are summed and
multiplied by the number of days in the proposed design life for the pavement. The
design loading for the pavement is expressed in MSA on Million Standard Axles.
Design loadings for pavements are normally in the range of 10 to 100 MSA. If the
individual axle loads are excessive then the loading for which the pavement must be
designed can be outside the range for which traditional flexible pavements are
normally designed unless the number of repetition is very small. However, since the
ability of a strong pavement to carry loads increase rapidly with increases in depth,
some extrapolation of flexible pavement design technique is possible. If design
loading increases beyond about 150 MSA, the pavement should fall outside the
known strength limits of flexible pavement and it would need to be designed as a
rigid pavement.
The purpose of the Axle Study was to enable estimates. to be made of the design
loading for Benghazi Third Ring Road by means of.:
 Determing the actual axle weights of vehicles using the Benghazi roads so that
the average damaging power of the commercial vehicle fleet in the city can be
determined.
Cars and light commercial vehicles are ignored for the purpose of pavement design.

3.0 DATA COLLECTION

3.1 General
Seven stations were located on radial roads and the eiahth at the harbour entrance.
These locations are shown in Figure 1 and listed in Table 1, together with details of
the periods during which the survey was conducted at each station.
At survey stations 1 to 7 traffic was surveyed going both to and from Benghazi,
whilst at station 8 only traffic leaving the Port was surveyed.

3.2 Axle Weighing

Weighing stations-were set up with the aid of the Traffic Police and Civil Guard, who
assisted in directing the vehicles to the weighed into the station. One Traffic
Policeman and at least one Civil Guard were provided for each direction.
As many heavy commercial vehicles as possible were weighed although it was not
possible to weigh all such vehicles without causing significant delays or obstruction.
As -far as was possible the vehicles to be weighed were selected on a random basis,
empty vehicles being included in the sample.
Simultaneously with the weighing, the axle spacing, vehicle make and commodity
carried were recorded together with the origin and destination of the vehicle. The
truck types were defined by the axle configurations, which are illustrated in Figure 2.
 TABLE 1
SURVEY STATION LOCATIONS AND DATES

WEIGHING AND
NAME, TYPE OF ROAD
SITE No. SURVEY & DATE
LOCATION
0.6.00 – 18.00
SUDANST TUESDAY
(1) SINGLECARRIAGEWAY
100 m past yellow farm wall 1/3/89
(2) COAST ROAD SATURDAY
DUAL CARRIAGEWAY
500 m past mosque 5/3/89
(3) TRIPOLI ROAD SUNDAY
DUAL CARRIACWAY
500 m past turn to cement factory 6/3/89
(4) TRIPOLI ROAD MONDAY
DUAL CARRIAGEWAY
By green houses - 7/3/89
(5) HAWARI ROAD WEDNESDAY
DUAL CARRIAGEWAY 9/3/89
50Dm past police post
(6) BENINA ROAD SATURDAY
DUAL CARRIAGEWAY
Opposite flats 12/3/89
(7) TOERUK ROAD S U N DAY
DUAL CARRIAGEWAY
500 m past police post 13/3/89
(8) HARBOUR ENTRANCE MONDAY
14/3/89
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 General
The damagin effect of a vehicle pavement increases significantly The usual way of
expressing this equivalent standard axles (ESA).
axle on the highway with increasing load.
is as a number of This factor is derived using the following formula, which was developed from
research undertaken oy AASHTO and reported in part in the AASHTO design guide
¿kg
ESA= Axle ¿load ¿in ¿¿¿
8160
Thus the damaging power of any axle is related to that of a stardard axle of 8.16
metric tonnes. For example the damage done by a 16 tonne axle is 21 times that done
by a standard axle, while a 4 tonne axle has a damaging power of less than 4 percent
of that of a standard axle.
4.2 Amendments to data
Prior to analysing the data, amendments its were made for the following reasons
- the wheel weighing equipment used was calibrated tn the factory up to a 10
tome load Whilst there is no reason to suppose that loads above 10 tonnes were
measured inaccLritely the Consultants considered it prudent in :he analysis to set all
measured loads greater than 15 tonnes to equal 15 tonnes. It should be noted that the
heaviest wheel load recorded was approximately 20 tonnes (implying an individual
axle load of
40 tonnes).
- due to the large numbers of commercial vehicles cass Lng many of the
sites, it was not possible
to weigh each vehicle. Howeve where vehicles of a particular observed, it was found
best to tance and configuration of emp than to weigh the axles of thE was therefore
necessary to adc axle loads for these vehicles sample analysed was equivalen sample.
The values added wer
and mean axle loads configuration
in certain cases type were repeatedly record the exisvehicles rather
vehicles. It in to the data .o ensure that the to a random the number of axles
for empty vehicles of each
in order to ensure that the results of the analysis were truly representative it was
necessary to eliminate all possibility of double counting caused by observing the
same origin/destination movement at more than one survey station. This was done by
excluding the results from survey stations 3 and 8 from the overall analysis.
Double counting could have arisen if these stations had been included because
1. Vehicles entering Benghazi via the Tripoli Road would have passed through
both stations 3 and 4.
2. Vehicles weighed at station 8 could also have passed through any of the other
stations.

4.3 Axle Loads

Results of the computer analysis based on the data adjusted as described in Section
4.2 are given in Appendix to this Report and include
(i) The number of axles with axle loads falling in groups by weight, tabulated for
all sites, directions and time periods combined, for nine major vehicle configurations,
remaining configurations and all configuhations combined.
(ii) Load on the heaviest axle on each vehicle falling in groups by weight tabulated as in (i).
(iii) Gross vehicle weights falling in groups by weight tabulated as in (i).
(iv) The ESA of the heaviest axle on each vehicle falling in groups by ESA
tabulated as in (i).
The total ESA per vehicle in groups by ESA tabulated as in (i).
(vi) The total ESA per vehicle for all vehicle types combined, in groups by ESA.
(vii) For nine major vehicle configurations, remaining configurations and total
vehicles combined the total vehicles passing all survey sites, the expanded total
E.S.A. and the expanded average E.S.A. per vehicle (calculated using MCC data).
2. The gross weight of 17 percent of vehicles was in excess of 40 tonnes and 35
percent of all vehicles had at least one axle greater than the

5. DISCUSSIONS OF RESULTS
5.1Mean damaging effects
 In Figure 3, this result is compared with figures obtained in other axle load
surveys inthe Middle East and with that currently used in Britain. Although there is a
general trend towards ESA! vehicle increasing with the year of observation, it can be
seen that the value of Benghazi lies above the majority of values elsewhere and is
some seven times greater than the value in Britain. If the Benghazi value increases in
line with the trend, the costs of construction and maintenance of both pavements and
bridges would rapidly become prohibitive. Further, and perhaps more important in
the short term, unless this figure can be reduced, it is difficult to envisage any type of
pavement, other than a heavy rigid pavement, which could be designed to give a life
of even ten years.
5.2Cement and Construction Vehicles
We have examined the base date in order to identify particular categories of vehicle
or particular ccmmodities which contribute excessively to the high mean damaging
effect per commercial vehicle, and have noted the following
- Loaded trucks carrying cement. average over 60 E.S.A. s per vehicle. Loaded
cement trucks comprise only 3 percent of all commercial vehicles, but contribute
some 10 percent of total E.S.A. s.
Similar, loaded trucks carrying construction materials (sand, aggregates etc.)
comprise some 17 percent of all heavy commercial vehicles and contribute 52 percent
of the total E. S. A. s.

6. CON CLUS IONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1Conclusions
1. The Mean Number of Equivalent Standard Axles per commercial vehicle
determined from the study is approximately 19. It should be notedthat 70 percent of
all vehicles have ESA/vehicie of less than 10. These figures should be compared with
the current British design rules for motorways of 2.9 ESA/vehicle.
present limit of ten tons. Approximately 17
percent of ‘all axle loads were in excess of
13 tonnes, and these 17-percent contribute 95 percent of the total damaging effect on
the roads.
3. The average ESA/vehicle varied, between 9 and 32 on different weighing
stations. The routes carrying most construction traffic, Tripoli Road and Coast Road,
had the highest ESA/vehicle, being 32 and 17 respectively.
4. Loaded vehicles carrying cement had an average ESA/vehicie in excess of 60.
Similarly, loaded vehicles carrying construction materials (sand, aggregates, blocks
etc.) had an average ESA! vehicle of 55. Excluding cement and construction vehicles
(loaded and unloaded) from the analysis reduced the average ESA/vehicle to 12.
5. Enforcement of maximum axle loads through conditions applied to
construction contracts could reduce the total damaging effect of vehicles on the roads
by up to 50 percent, notwithstanding the increased number of vehicles required to
maintain the total tonnage hauled.
6. If no steps are taken to limit the use of excessively heavy and heavily laden
vehicles, the foregoing figures would require the construction of very thick and
expensive road pavements and large expenditures on maintenance. Rigid (i.e.
concrete) pavements may become necessary to reduce maintenance to reasonable
levels if no control on axle loads is implemented.
7. If legislation were introduced to control all vehicles the damaging effect of the
vehicles could be reduced by up to 75 percent.

6.2 Recommendations
1. We recommend that immediate steps be taken to control the loading of
vehicles carrying cement. This could be done by the installation of a weighbridge at
the factory to check the gross weight of loaded vehicles. A maximum gross weight
for each configuration of axles on a vehicle can be defined as a loading limit.
2. We recommend that all future construction contracts should specifically require
that the Contractor obeys similar gross weight criteria, for any vehicle used on the
public roads. The excessive damageing effect attributable to 1 x 2-configuration
trucks joining the Tripoli Road north of station 3 should be reviewed and if
continuing immediate steps should be taken to control the gross weight of these
vehicles.
3. We strongly recommend that legislation in the form of “Construction and Use”
regulations be introduced and enforced on a national basis. These regulations should
be designed to control the gross weights and dimensions of each type of vehicle
imported for use on public roads. Enforcement of this type of legislation is normally
by means of. a system which combines licensing with exdmination and testing and
field checks are made easier by plates fixed to approved vehicles stating their
maximum allowable gross weight.
4. We recommend that axle load legislation be enforced on a national basis at
some realistic limit. This limit would either be determined from an assessment of the
design limits to which imported vehicles are manufactured or from a more
comprehensive study which would analyse factors such as economics of vehicle
operation and highway maintenance and safety. Enforcement of such legislation
would require the setting up of both permanent and mobile weighing stations and a
system of fines for offenders. To enforce existing legislation which has a 10 tonne
axle load limit, would be difficult in view of the type of vehicles presently operating
in the country. A higher limit would be more readily seen as equitable by operators
and would allow the operation of most existing vehicles at payloads approaching
those for which their chassis, braking systems, axles etc. are designed.

TABLE
C1 The number of axles with axle loads falling in groups by weight,
tabulated for all sites, directions and time periods combined, for nine
major vehicle configurations, remaining configurations and all
configurations combined.
C2 Load on the heaviest axle on each vehicle falling in groups by weight
tabulated as in (i).
C3 Gross vehicle weights falling in groups by weight tabulated as in (i).
C4 The E.S.A. of the heaviest axle on each vehicle falling in groups by
ESA tabulated as in (i).
C5 The total E.SA. per vehicle in groups by ESA tabulated as in (i).
C6 The total E.S.A.per vehicle for all vehicle types combined, in groups
by ESA.
C7 For nine major vehicle configurations, remaining configurations and
total vehicles combined the total vehicles passing all survey sites, the
expanded total E.S.A. and the expanded average E.S.A. per vehicle
(calculated using MCC data).