Structural Eveluation of Rigid Pavements by FWD

IRC-117-2015

1 Construction History
Month & Year of Construction
Traffic Considered during Design
Thickness & Strength of Pavement Concrete
CBR of subgrade
Modulus of subgrade reaction considered in design
Temperature differenctial of Pavement Concrete

Traffic
Axle Load Survey
Minumu for 48 Hours of atlest 10% of traffic
Axle Load Spectrum
Lad Interval
Single -10KN
Tandem Axle-20KN
Tridem Axle-30KN
Table-1 : Spectrum of Axle Load

Single Tandem
Cumulati Axle
Axle
Load Class ve Load
Mark kN Number
Interval Interval
of Axles
kN kN

195-205 200 390-410

185-195 190 370-390
175-185 180 350-370
165-175 170 330-350
155-165 160 310-330
145-155 150 290-310
C=(365*A*((1+r)n -1) / r
C= Cummulative number of axles
A= Initial number of axles per day
r= Annual growth rate of traffic
n=period in years after construction

Evaluation of subgrade modulus, Elastic Modulus of Concrete & Strength of Pavement Concrete
1. FWD should b done and deflection at 0, 300. 600 & 900 mm radial distances be measured
2. Area Parameter of Deflection basin (A)
A= 6[1+2(D1/D0)+2(D2/D0)+(D3/D0)]
D0 = Deflection at Centre 0.08 mm
D1= Deflection at 300mm from Centre 0.075 mm
D2= Deflection at 600mm from Centre 0.065 mm
D3= Deflection at 900mm from Centre 0.056 mm
Value of A shall be between 11.8 to 36
A= 6[1+2(D1/D0)+2(D2/D0)+(D3/D0)] 31.2
d0 = Normalised Deflection at Centre 2.496 mm 3.137 39.2125
d1= Normalised Deflection at 300mm from Centre 2.34 mm 2.294 30.5867
d2=Normalised Deflection at 600mm from Centre 2.028 mm 2.578 39.6615
d3= Normalised Deflection at 900mm from Centre 1.7472 mm 2.15 38.3929
l= 991.968 mm

ki = Pdi/l2Di
k1 1.9925
k2 1.5542
k3 2.01532
k4 1.95086
Average (k) = 1.87822 Mpa/m
Design k 39
Elastic modulus of concrete =Ec= 12(1-mc)kl4/1000h3 32908

Compressive strength of concrete =f c=(Ec/5000)0.5 2.56546

0.50
Flexural strength of concrete =f cr=0.70(fc) 1.12119
 Cumulati Tridem Cumulati
Class ve Axle Class ve
Mark Number Load Mark Number
kN2 of Interval kN4 of
Axles3 kN Axles5

400 585-615 600

390 555-585 590
380 525-555 580
370 495-525 570
360 465-495 460
350 435-465 450
 IRC:58-2015 Guidelines for Design of
Plain Jointed Rigid Pavements for Highways
Example of Design of Slab Thickness for Pavement
(with and without doweled transverse joints. Beta value will be 0.66 for doweled joint and 0.90 for without dowels case)
Type of pavement considered Pavement Structural Details

4-lane Modulus of subgrade reaction of subgrade, MPa/m

Carriageway divided
50.3

Thickness of Granular Subbase, mm 150

Shoulders :- Tied concrete shoulders ? (yes/no) yes Thickness of Dry Lean Concrete subbase, mm 150

Transverse joint spacing (m) 4.5 Effective

MPa/m
modulus of subgrade reaction of foundation,
285

Lane width (m) 3.5 Unit weight of Concrete, kN/m 3

24
Transverse Joints have dowel bars? (yes/no) yes 28-day Flexural strength of cement concrete, MPa 4.5
Max. day-time Temperature Differential in slab, 0C (for
Design Traffic Estimation bottom-up cracking)
16.8

0
Design Period (years) 30 Night-time Temperature Differential in slab, C (for top- 13.4
down cracking) = day-time diff/2 + 5
Total Two-way Commercial Traffic (cvpd) in the year of 6000 Trial Thickness of Concrete Slab, m 0.28
completion of construction
Av. Annual rate of growth of commercial traffic 0.075 Load Transfer Efficiency Factor for TDC analysis, Beta = 0.66
(expressed as decimal) 0.66 for dowel Joints, 0.90 for joints without dowels
Cumulative No of Commercial vehicles during design
226444692 Elastic Modulus of Concrete, Ec (MPa) 30000
period (two-way), A
Average No of axles per commercial vehicle, B 2.35 Poisson's Ratio of Concrete, Mu 0.15
Cumulative No of Commercial Axles during design
532145025 Radius of relative stiffness, m 0.66621
period (two-way), C = A*B
Proportion of traffic in predominant direction (For 2-
lane 2-way highways use a value of 1.0), D
0.50 Design Axle Load Repetitions for Fatigue Analysis

Lateral Placement factor (0.25 for 2-lane 2-way. For

multilane highways the value is 0.25 X C), E
0.125 For Bottom-up Cracking Analysis

Factor for selection of traffic for BUC analysis (for six- 0.2 Front single (steering) Axles = H * K1 5986632
hour period during day), F

Factor for selection of traffic for TDC analysis (for six-

0.3 Rear single Axles = H * K2 1995544
hour period during day), G
Design axle repetitions for BUC analysis (for 6 hour day
13303626 Tandem Axles = H * K3 3325906
time traffic), H = B*E*F

Proportion of vehicles with spacing between front and

the first rear axle less than the spacing of transverse 0.55 Tridem Axles = H * K4 1995544
joints, I
Design axle repetitions for TDC analysis (for 6-hour
night time traffic), J = B*E*G*I
10975491 For Top-Down Cracking Analysis

Proportion of Front single (steering) Axles, K1 0.450 Front single (steering) Axles = J * K1 4938971
Proportion of Rear single Axles,K2 0.150 Rear single Axles = J * K2 1646324
Proportion of tandem Axles, K3 0.250 Tandem Axles = J * K3 2743873
Proportion of Tridem Axles, K4 = (1-K1-K2-K3) 0.150 Tridem Axles = J * K4 1646324
 Fatigue Damage Analysis
Axle Load Spectrum Data
Bottom-up Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Day-time (6 hour) traffic Top-Down Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Night
and Positive Temperature Differential

Rear Single Axle Rear Tandem Axle Rear Tridem Axle Rear Single Axles Rear Tandem Axles Rear Single Axles

Load Mid-Point of Mid-Point of Load Mid-Point of Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue
Group Load Group Frequency Load Load Group Frequency Group Load Group Frequency Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage
(kN) (kN) (%) Group (kN) (kN) (%) (kN) (kN) (%) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni)

185-195 190 18.15 380 - 400 390 14.5 530-560 545 5.23 362191 2.503 0.506 588331 0.616 482256 2.1177 0.428 infinite 0.000 298808 2.399 0.485 1768731 0.169

175-185 180 17.43 360 - 380 370 10.5 500-530 515 4.85 347823 2.422 0.489 1344185 0.259 349220 2.0448 0.413 infinite 0.000 286954 2.344 0.473 3899961 0.074
165-175 170 18.27 340 - 360 350 3.63 470-500 485 3.44 364586 2.341 0.473 4072762 0.090 120730 1.972 0.398 infinite 0.000 300783 2.288 0.462 11091781 0.027

155-165 160 12.98 320 - 340 330 2.5 440-470 455 7.12 259022 2.260 0.457 22079767 0.012 83148 1.8992 0.384 infinite 0.000 213693 2.233 0.451 52048021 0.004

145-155 150 2.98 300 - 320 310 2.69 410-440 425 10.11 59467 2.179 0.440 infinite 0.000 89467 1.8264 0.369 infinite 0.000 49060 2.177 0.440 infinite 0.000

135-145 140 1.62 280 - 300 290 1.26 380-410 395 12.01 32328 2.099 0.424 infinite 0.000 41906 1.7536 0.354 infinite 0.000 26670 2.122 0.429 infinite 0.000

125-135 130 2.62 260 - 280 270 3.9 350-380 365 15.57 52283 2.018 0.408 infinite 0.000 129710 1.6808 0.340 infinite 0.000 43134 2.066 0.417 infinite 0.000

115-125 120 2.65 240 - 260 250 5.19 320-350 335 13.28 52882 1.937 0.391 infinite 0.000 172615 1.608 0.325 infinite 0.000 43628 2.011 0.406 infinite 0.000

105-115 110 2.65 220 - 240 230 6.3 290-320 305 4.55 52882 1.856 0.375 infinite 0.000 209532 1.5352 0.310 infinite 0.000 43628 1.955 0.395 infinite 0.000

95-105 100 3.25 200 - 220 210 6.4 260-290 275 3.16 64855 1.775 0.359 infinite 0.000 212858 1.4623 0.295 infinite 0.000 53506 1.900 0.384 infinite 0.000

85-95 90 3.25 180 - 200 190 8.9 230-260 245 3.1 64855 1.695 0.342 infinite 0.000 296006 1.3895 0.281 infinite 0.000 53506 1.844 0.373 infinite 0.000

< 85 80 14.15 < 180 170 34.23 < 230 215 17.58 282369 1.614 0.326 infinite 0.000 1138458 1.3167 0.266 infinite 0.000 232955 1.789 0.361 infinite 0.000

100 100 100 1995544 Fat Dam from Sing. Axles = 0.976 3325906 Fat Dam from Tand Axles = 0.000 1646324 Fat Dam from Sing. Axles = 0.274

Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage due to single and

tandem axle loads =
0.976 + 0.000 = 0.976 Total Top-Down Fatigu
Front Single Axles and Rear Tridem axles not considered for bottom-up analysis
Sum of CFD for BUC & TDC= 1.730 DESIGN IS UNSAFE S

Design for Bonded Pavement Option

Subgrade CBR (%)= 8 Trial Slab thickness (m) over DLC, h1 0.235 Poisson's Ratio of DLC, m2 0.2 Total Flexural Stiffness P

Granular Subabse Thickness (mm) = 250 Provide DLC thickness (m), h2 0.15 Depth to Neutral axis, m (See Fig.6) 0.16 which is more than the F
Effective k-value from Tables 2 and 3 (MPa/m) = 72.0 Elastic Modulus of Pavement Concrete (MPa), E1 30000 Flex Stiffness of design Slab 69.05 Hence, Provide a Slab of
For k of 72.0 MPa/m and for Elastic Modulus of DLC (MPa), E2 13600 Flex Stiffness of Partial Slab Provided 46.65 Slab thickness (h1) over
Doweled Joint and Tied Concrete Shoulders, Slab Thickness (m) = 0.3 Poisson's Ratio of Paving Concrete, m1 0.15 Flex Stiffness of DLC 23.28 design stiffness with the
Analysis

e Analysis for Night-time (6 hour) traffic and Negative Temperature Differential

Rear Tridem Axles

Rear Tandem Axles (Stress computed for 33% of
(Stess computed for 50% of axle load) axle load)
Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Allowable Fatigue
Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Stress Repetitions Damage
(ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa Ratio (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni)

397862 2.4269 0.490 1267085 0.314 86103 2.3529 0.475 3370878 0.026

288107 2.3714 0.479 2564487 0.112 79847 2.2974 0.464 9089367 0.009
99603 2.3159 0.468 6308978 0.016 56634 2.2419 0.453 38025932 0.001

68597 2.2604 0.457 21946523 0.003 117218 2.1864 0.442 infinite 0.000

73810 2.2049 0.445 infinite 0.000 166443 2.1309 0.430 infinite 0.000

34573 2.1494 0.434 infinite 0.000 197723 2.0754 0.419 infinite 0.000

107011 2.0939 0.423 infinite 0.000 256333 2.0199 0.408 infinite 0.000

142407 2.0384 0.412 infinite 0.000 218632 1.9644 0.397 infinite 0.000

172864 1.9829 0.401 infinite 0.000 74908 1.9089 0.386 infinite 0.000

175608 1.9274 0.389 infinite 0.000 52024 1.8534 0.374 infinite 0.000

244205 1.8719 0.378 infinite 0.000 51036 1.7979 0.363 infinite 0.000

939228 1.8164 0.367 infinite 0.000 289424 1.7424 0.352 infinite 0.000

2743873 Fat Dam from Tand Axles = 0.445 1646324 Fat Dam from Tridem Axles = 0.036

Total Top-Down Fatigue Damage = 0.274 + 0.445 + 0.036 = 0.755

DESIGN IS UNSAFE SINCE SUM OF CFD FOR BUC AND TDC>1

Total Flexural Stiffness Provided = 46.65 + 23.28 = 69.93

which is more than the Flexural Stiffness of the Design Slab = 69.05
Hence, Provide a Slab of thickness (m) 0.235 over DLC of thickness (m) 0.15
Slab thickness (h1) over DLC layer may be obtained by iteratively changing h1 and matching the
design stiffness with the combined stiffness provided