road sector development programme - package 3 interim ... · road sector development programme -...
TRANSCRIPT
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMME - PACKAGE 3
INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN
AND COST CHARTS
PERKERETAAPIAN INDONESIA KE DEPAN NASKAH ANTARA MENUJU NASKAH AKHIR RENCANA INDUK PERKERETAAPIAN NASIONAL
INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3
ACTIVITY NO. 201
November 2010
INDONESIA
INFRASTRUCTURE
INITIATIVE
INDONESIA INFRASTRUCTURE INITIATIVE
This document has been published by the Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative (IndII), an Australian Government funded project designed to promote economic growth in Indonesia by enhancing the relevance, quality and quantum of infrastructure investment.
The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australia Indonesia Partnership or the Australian Government. Please direct any comments or questions to the IndII Director, tel. +62 (21) 230-6063, fax +62 (21) 3190-2994. Website: www.indii.co.id.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report has been prepared by Cardno Emerging Markets in Association with ARRB, who are engaged under IndII, funded by AusAID, as part of the Directorate General of Highways (DGH) Road Sector Development Programme. Edward James was the principal author.
Any errors of fact or interpretation of previous studies under IndII Road Sector Development Programme are solely those of the author.
Ed Vowles, Team Leader
Jakarta, November 2010
Document Control: Interim pavement design and cost charts (Deliverable 3)
Version Date Author Reviewer
Name Initials Name Initials
#2 March 2011 Edward James
Ed Vowles
© IndII 2010
All original intellectual property contained within this document is the property of the Indonesia
Infrastructure Initiative (IndII). It can be used freely without attribution by consultants and IndII partners in
preparing IndII documents, reports designs and plans; it can also be used freely by other agencies or
organisations, provided attribution is given.
Every attempt has been made to ensure that referenced documents within this publication have been
correctly attributed. However, IndII would value being advised of any corrections required, or advice
concerning source documents and/ or updated data.
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................... IV
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2: INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN CHARTS .................................................... 2
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS ............................... 4
3.1 GENERAL ....................................................................................... 4
3.2 CONSTRUCTION QUALITY ................................................................... 4
3.3 OVERLOADING ................................................................................ 4
3.4 CAUSAL FACTOR CORRECTIONS ........................................................... 5
3.4.1 Climate factor (CF1) ................................................................ 5 3.4.2 Asphalt fatigue (CF2) .............................................................. 6
3.5 SUPPLEMENTARY COST STUDIES .......................................................... 7
3.5.1 Drainage ................................................................................. 7 3.5.2 Sealed shoulders .................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 17
ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Pavement Design Charts .................................................................................. 2 Table 3.1: Climate Zone Causal Factors (CF1) .................................................................... 5 Table 3.2: Asphalt Fatigue Causal Factors (CF2) ................................................................ 6
iii
LIST OF DESIGN CHART
Design Chart 1: Foundation Design for Flexible and Rigid Pavement ............................... 8 Design Chart 2: New Flexible Pavement ........................................................................... 9 Design Chart 3: Rigid Pavement - Legal Loading ............................................................. 10 Design Chart 4: Rigid Pavement - Overloaded Case ....................................................... 11 Design Chart 5: Design Chart 5 - Reconstructed Pavement (for existing flexible
pavements with granular bases) ........................................................... 12 Design Chart 6: Minimum Existing Pavement Foundation for Chart 5 Pavement .......... 13 Design Chart 7: Asphalt Overlay ..................................................................................... 14
iv
ABBREVIATIONS
AASHTO Association of American State Highway and Transportation Officials AC Asphaltic Concrete AC c Fine graded Asphaltic Concrete AC f Coarse Graded asphaltic Concrete AC BC Asphaltic Concrete Binder Course AC WC Asphaltic Concrete Wearing Course AMP Asphalt Mixing Plant ARRB Australian Road Research Board Austroads Association of Australian and New Zealand Road Transport and Traffic
Authorities BP 07C Heavy Loaded Roads II Project Lohbener, West Java BPJT Toll Road Regulatory Agency CBR Californian Bearing Ratio CCF Cumulative Causal Factor CESA Cumulative Equivalent Standard Axles CF Causal factor: factor causing a reduction in pavement performance that
is not addressed by current Indonesian pavement design practice CIRCLY Australian Mechanistic Design Software Program used by Austroads 2004 CTB Cement Treated Base DCP Dynamic Cone Penetrometer DED Detail Engineering Design DG Director General DGH Directorate General of Highways EA Executing Agency EBL 01 EINRIP Project Tohpati, Bali EINRIP Eastern Indonesia National Road Improvement Project ESA Equivalent Standard Axle FWD Falling Weight Deflectometer FY Fiscal Year Gol Government of Indonesia HDM Highway Design Model HRODI Hot Rolled Sheet Road Overlay Design System Indonesia HRS Hot Rolled Sheet HVAG Heavy Vehicle Axle Group IDPL Infrastructure Development Policy Loan IndII Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative IRI International Roughness Index IRMS Indonesian Road Management System Km Kilometre LCC Life Cycle Cost LMC Lean Mix Concrete LSF Load Safety Factor (concrete pavement) M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MEF Monitoring and Evaluation Framework
v
MoF Ministry of Finance MPW Ministry of Public Works MTEF Medium Term Expenditure Framework ORN Overseas Road Note PANTURA North Java Corridor (Jakarta – Surabaya) PBB Performance Based Budgeting PBC Performance Based Contracting PC Procurement Committee PPC Project Preparation Consultant PPK Pejabat Pembuat Komitment RDS Road Design System RF Reliability factor SAMI Stress Absorbing Membrane Interlayer SMA Split Mastic Asphalt SMEC Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation SGx Subgrade Class TFAC Technical and Financial Audit Consultant TLD Traffic Load Distribution Factor TOR Terms of Reference TRL Transport Road Laboratory (UK) VDF Vehicle Damage Factor
INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The interim pavement design matrices presented in this report are designed to facilitate whole-of-life analysis of a comprehensive range of designs and causal factors.
The designs have been developed using the methods stated in Table 2.1 but generally satisfy several applicable design methods (DGH 2002, 2003 and 2005, Association of American State Highway and Transportation Officials [AASHTO] 93, Austria’s 2008 [2010 now issued]) as appropriate).
Catalogues of standard design solutions are planned for the proposed Pavement Design Guideline Supplements and additional Guideline Modules. The final form of the design catalogues will depend on the warrants determined from the “Whole-of-Life” analyses and may therefore differ from the matrices presented here.
The solutions are to be considered as interim because the form of the solutions catalogues to be presented in the Guideline Supplements will differ from these solutions and will be influenced by:
a) The pavement life cycle cost (LCC) investigation outcomes (deliverable 4)
b) Design input parameters and causal factor refinements that are still under investigation
Information on the basis for proposed changes in design approach is provided by the report “National Roads Pavement Design Guidelines and Practice Review.”
The Charts presented here therefore are not intended for field use. They represent interim solutions to facilitate the life cycle cost analysis and warrant selection process required by Activities 3 and 4 of the project Terms of Reference (ToF).
2 INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
CHAPTER 2: INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN CHARTS
A set of 7 Pavement Design Charts has been developed for Indonesian conditions to support the life cycle cost design investigation. These cover the range of solutions proposed for the Design Guideline Supplements. The charts provided are described in Table 2.1. Each solution provided by Charts 2–5 and 7 includes an associated cost for input to life cycle cost analyses.
Table 2.1: Pavement Design Charts
Chart Title Purpose Design Reference Suggested Treatment
in Whole-of-Life Analysis
1 Foundation design for flexible and rigid pavement
Describes sub-grade improvement and capping requirements for both flexible and rigid pavement so reduces the complexity of Charts 2–5
Association of Australian and New Zealand Road Transport and Traffic Authorities (Austroads) 2008
Omit since the foundation structure is common to all solutions
2 New flexible pavement
Incorporates all surfacing types and both granular and cemented bases using limit points based on least direct cost and established performance limits –extensions beyond these limits can be investigated when appropriate
DGH 2002 Secondary overload factors can be input via the Cumulative Causal Factor multiplier (CCF). Suggested values are provided in Section 3.4. The final Design Catalogues will include rigorous analyses
3 Rigid pavement – legal loading
Rigid pavement cost for four cases
DGH 2003 This solution cannot be used in Indonesia due to chronic overload. It is provided for use in analysis of overload costs
4 Rigid pavement - overloaded
The impacts of overloading of rigid pavement are complex and require a full design analysis
DGH 2003 Dowelled joints and tied shoulders are clearly the most cost effective for the overloaded case – other options need not be considered further
5 Reconstructed pavement
Standard solutions Austroads 2008
Chart 6 applies but need not be considered for the whole-of-life analysis
INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
3
CHAPTER 2: INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN CHARTS
Chart Title Purpose Design Reference Suggested Treatment
in Whole-of-Life Analysis
6 Minimum substructure for recycled pavement
Describes the minimum existing substructure required for Chart 5 solutions. When the substructure is not present Chart 5 does not apply - a full analysis is required
Austroads 2008 Not relevant to the life cycle cost analysis
7 Overlay solutions
Provides overlay solutions and costs, and structural design trigger deflections
DGH 2005, Asphalt Institute, Austroads 2008
Use of 5th power traffic analysis is recommended for asphaltic concrete (AC) solutions but not for Hot Rolled Sheet (HRS)
4 INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS
The following simplifying assumptions have been made to limit the number of possible solutions and the consequent complexity of the life cycle cost analyses.
3.1 GENERAL
a) Asphalt types service ranges and layer thickness ranges are as defined by the DGH General Specification (refer to Chart 2)
b) Granular layer thicknesses have been constrained by the 200mm maximum rule relating to compaction and by an additional rule that for best field compaction, the minimum layer thickness should be not less than four times the maximum particle size. (There is a case for providing finer graded aggregate base A to reduce segregation issues and to permit lower cost solutions.)
c) The “Traffic” axis of Charts 1, 2, 5, and 6 represents both legally loaded and overloaded fleets. When comparing overloading and legally loaded cases, equivalent “weight-of-goods-transported” traffic values must be used. Cumulative Equivalent Standard Axles (CESA) values are 4th power in all cases to avoid confusion. Causal factors (CF) including load related effects not addressed by the 4th power rule are included by means of a Cumulative Causal Factor (CCF).
3.2 CONSTRUCTION QUALITY
Construction quality is addressed by the reliability factor imbedded in both AASHTO and Austroads based design methods. Current construction quality in Indonesia requires a much larger reliability factor adjustment than is currently provided.
Construction quality has impacts that are so great that the problem must be addressed directly, rather than through design process adjustments.
3.3 OVERLOADING
The technical costs of overloading are largely captured by the CESA value if determined using realistic vehicle damage factors and by causal factors (CF; e.g. CF 2).
The safety related costs of overloading are not captured by this approach and must be addressed separately. This issue should be the subject of a separate report.
INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
5
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS
3.4 CAUSAL FACTOR CORRECTIONS
A number of causal factors affecting pavement performance but not addressed by standard design procedures were identified by the report “National Roads Pavement Design Guidelines and Practice Review.” The most significant of these factors are addressed in the Charts by the Cumulative Causal Factor (CCF) multiplier applied to the standard CESA value in Charts 1, 2, 5, and 6, where
CCF = CF1xCF2xCF3 x........
The impact of a range of causal factors can be addressed in this manner without extending the complexity of the cost analysis programme. It is suggested that only two factors, climate and asphalt fatigue, need to be considered in the life cycle cost analysis.
The benefits of good drainage and shoulder sealing are too complex to be addressed by the CCF approach and will be investigated separately.
Other causal factors described in “National Roads Pavement Design Guidelines and Practice Review” Section 4, such as the impact of multi axle groups on soft sub-grades, are considered not to justify inclusion in the life cycle cost analysis. They will be addressed in the Design Supplements as necessary.
3.4.1 Climate factor (CF1)
This factor represents the time during which the sub-grade is at elevated moisture content.
Proposed Climate Factors are as provided in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Climate Zone Causal Factors (CF1)
Zone Description Example
Locations Rainfall
(mm/annum)
Period
Sub-grade Wet
(based on rain >80mm/month
(months))
Provisional Design Life
Causal Factor (CF1)
I Tropical, sub-humid with strongly seasonal rainfall
Flores, Palu <1400 6 1
II Tropical, sub-humid with seasonal rainfall
Sumbawa, Bali
1400–1800 7 1.2
III Tropical humid with seasonal rainfall
Jakarta, Bandung
1900–2300 8 1.3
6 INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
Zone Description Example
Locations Rainfall
(mm/annum)
Period
Sub-grade Wet
(based on rain >80mm/month
(months))
Provisional Design Life
Causal Factor (CF1)
IV
Tropical, per humid with year round rainfall and high humidity and/or moisture surplus
Some mountainous areas
>2300 12 2
3.4.2 Asphalt fatigue (CF2)
It is widely accepted that asphalt fatigue develops according to a 5th power rule (Shell 1978). This effect is not significant for countries with predominantly legally loaded vehicles but is highly significant for Indonesia.
New pavements and reconstructed pavements
The factor represents the ratio of Equivalent Standard Axles (ESA) calculated using a 5th power rule to the same calculation using a 4th power rule.
Asphalt overlay (CF 2overlay)
The multiplier of 1.8/1.2=1.5 is proposed for asphaltic concrete to convert Australian (4th power based, legally loaded) solutions to the Indonesian case. Hot Rolled Sheet Road Overlay Design System Indonesia (HRODI) was developed for HRS asphalts and Indonesian conditions and arguably therefore is already calibrated for the Indonesian overloading case.
Table 3.2: Asphalt Fatigue Causal Factors (CF2)
Legal Loading (provisional)
Overloading (normal case Indonesia)
New, reconstructed and recycled pavements 1.21 1.8
AC overlays 1 1.5
HRS overlays 0.7 1
1 Reasonable degree of legal loading target = typical Australian “legal” loading correction factor
INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
7
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS
3.5 SUPPLEMENTARY COST STUDIES
The following two issues will be addressed by specific studies. Their impacts cannot be adequately described by causal factor type adjustments.
3.5.1 Drainage
The problem of drainage impact on sub-grade strength is addressed within DGH 2002 and by AASHTO 93 by an “m” factor adjustment to granular layer thickness. However low “m” values (an extreme “m” value of 0.4 is provided by AASHTO for saturation greater than 25 percent of service life), although clearly warranted by some field conditions in Indonesia, are rarely used in practice. The problem is addressed by some other Guidelines (British Highway Agency) by an adjustment to the presumptive value adopted for sub-grade bearing capacity. This approach may have benefit for Indonesia because it is more intuitive than the “m” value approach. The cost of poor drainage determined by the “m” factor adjustment, is too great for poor drainage solutions to be adopted except in exceptional circumstances. Comprehensive drainage solutions will therefore be advocated by the Supplementary Guidelines.
3.5.2 Sealed shoulders
Shoulder sealing has several significant benefits. Technical benefits include a reduction in the moisture content variation in the sub-grade which reduces movement of expansive sub-grades and increases the effective bearing capacity of all sub-grades. The safety and user benefits, particularly for motorcyclists, un-motorised vehicles and pedestrians, are obvious.
Appropriate warrants for shoulder sealing will be determined.
8 INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
Design Chart 1: Foundation Design for Flexible and Rigid Pavement
Sub-grade
Strength Class
Characteristic Sub-grade Bearing
Capacity
(90 percentile, 4 day soak, 95%
standard compaction CBR)
TRAFFIC CLASS (106 CCFxCESA)
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11
<0.3 0.3–0.5 0.5–1 1–2 2–2.5 2.5–5 5–10 10–30 30–50 50–100 100–200
LAYER THICKNESS (mm)
FO
UN
DA
TIO
N
Sub-grade improvement
(stabilisation or selected
embankment material)
SG6 ≥6 No improvement required
SG5 5 100 100 100 100 100
SG4 4 100 100 100 100 100 100 150 150 200 200 200
SG3 3 200 150 150 150 200 200 250 250 250 300 300
SG2.5 2.5 250 175 175 200 225 250 300 300 300 325 350
SG2 2 300 200 200 250 250 300 350 350 350 350 400
Capping layer SG1(5) <2 (6) Provisional (2),(3) 1200mm granular capping (or 800mm geo-grid)
INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
9
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS
Design Chart 2: New Flexible Pavement
TRAFFIC CLASS
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11
Effective Design Life (106 CCFxCESA)
<0.3 0.3–0.5 0.5–1 1–2 2–2.5 2.5–5 5–10 10–30 30–50 50–100 100–200
Preferred Surfacing Type
HRS, SS, surface dress, penmac or
lasbutag HRS AC f AC c
AC c 2 but consider rigid pavement
(Chart 4)
Base Type Granular Base A Cement Treated Base A (subject to contractor resource availability)
PAVEMENT LAYER THICKNESS (mm)
ST
RU
CT
UR
E N
EW
FL
EX
IBL
E P
AV
EM
EN
T
Bitumen bound layers
HRS WC 30 30
HRS Base 35 35
Surface dressing 20
AC f WC 40 40 40 40
AC f binder 60 60 60 60
AC C WC 40 40 40 40 40
AC C binder 60 60 60 60 60
AC Base 60 140 75 3 75 75 125 160 240
CTB, granular
base
CTB 200 200 200 200 200 200
Base A 150 150 150 150 150 150
Base B3 150 150 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Structure Unit Price
Rp/m2 112,500 172,538 185,038 260,000 341,000 449,000 423,750 423,750 423,750 491,250 538,500 658,500
2 The lesat cost solution may be dowelled Rigid pavement (refer DESIGN CHARTS 3 and 4
3 Consider omission or reduction if sub-grade is stabilised or if an improved sub-grade with CBR≥5 percent is provided
10 INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
Design Chart 3: Rigid Pavement - Legal Loading
(NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION IN INDONESIA - SEE OVERLOADED CASE)
1. JOINTED AND DOWELLED, LSF 1.1
Traffic volume medium Heavy
Heavy vehicle axle groups 4.3x106 43x106
Tied shoulders Yes Yes
Rigid base (mm) 200 215185
LMC sub-base (mm) 150 150
Granular base on sub-grade CBR 6 (mm) 150 150
Structure unit price : (Rp/m2) 382,500 405,000
2. PLAIN CONCRETE, JOINTED, UNDOWELLED, LSF 1.1
Traffic volume Medium Heavy
Heavy vehicle axle groups 4.3x106 43x106
Tied shoulders Yes Yes
Rigid base (mm) 215 230
LMC sub-base (mm) 150 150
Granular base on sub-grade CBR 6 (mm) 150 150
Structure unit price : ( Rp/m2) 405,000 427,500
INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
11
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS
Design Chart 4: Rigid Pavement - Overloaded Case
1. JOINTED AND DOWELLED
Traffic volume Intermediate Heavy
CESA (4th power) 50x106 500x106
Approx equivalent in terms of goods transported legally loaded HVAG
4.3x106 43x106
Tied shoulders Yes No Yes No
PAVEMENT STRUCTURE (mm)
Rigid base 265 330 295 415
LMC sub-base 150 150 150 150
Granular base on sub-grade CBR 6 150 150 150 150
Cost Rp/m2 525,000 622,500 570,000 750,000
2. PLAIN CONCRETE, JOINTED, UNDOWELLED
Traffic volume Intermediate Heavy
CESA (4th power) 50x106 500x106
Approx equivalent in terms of goods transported legally loaded HVAG
4.3x106 43x106
Tied shoulder Yes Yes
Rigid base 360 410
LMC sub-base 150 150
Granular base on sub-grade CBR 6 150 150
Cost Rp/m2 667,500 742,500
12 INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
Design Chart 5: Design Chart 5 - Reconstructed Pavement (for existing flexible pavements with granular bases)
TRAFFIC CLASS
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11
Corrected cumulative standard axles for design
life (106 CCFxCESA) <0.3 0.3–0.5 0.5–1 1–2 2–2.5 2.5–5 5–10 10–30 30–50 50–100 100–200
Preferred surfacing type HRS, SS, surface dress, penmac or lasbutag
HRS ACf AC c
Base type Granular Recycled
PAVEMENT LAYER THICKNESS (mm)
bitumen bound layers
HRS WC 30 30
HRS Base 35 35
Surface dressing 20
AC f WC 40 40 40
AC f binder 60 60 60
AC C WC 40 40 40 40 40
AC C binder 60 60 60 60 60
AC f binder first layer 60 75 75 75 75 75 90
cement treated base, granular
base
Recycled base (CTB)(2) 225 225 225 250 275 300 300
Base A 150 150 200 200
Reconstruction structure unit price Rp/m2
77,500 135,000 147,500 185,000 328,500 348,750 348,750 361,250 373,750 386,250 406,500
PROVINCIAL AND KABUPATEN ROAD MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PLANNING
13
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS
Design Chart 6: Minimum Existing Pavement Foundation for Chart 5 Pavement
Existing Sub-grade Strength
Class
Existing Sub-grade Bearing Capacity
(90 percentile minimum, 4 day
soaked, 95% standard compaction
CBR)
TRAFFIC CLASS (106 CCFxCESA)
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11
<0.3 0.3–0.5 0.5–1 1–2 2–2.5 2.5–5 5–10 10–30 30–50 50–100 100–200
Minimum thickness of existing granular and selected embankment pavement layers beneath CHART 5
reconstructed or recycled pavement - other rules apply (mm) (1)
Existing Sub-grade
SG6 ≥6 150 150 200 200
SG5 5 150 150 200 200
SG4 4 250 250 300 300 100 100 150 150 200 200 200
SG3 3 350 300 350 350 200 200 250 250 250 300 300
SG2.5 2.5 400 325 375 400 225 250 300 300 300 325 350
SG2 2 450 350 400 450 250 300 350 350 350 350 400
SG1 <2 1500 1425 1475 1500 1325 1350 1400 1400 1400 1425 1450
14 INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
Design Chart 7: Asphalt Overlay
CCFxCESA (106)
and Asphalt
Type
Benkelman Beam
Deflection (mm)
Overlay (mm)
Cost Rp/m2
CCFxCESA (106)
and Asphalt
Type
Benkelman Beam
Deflection (mm)
Overlay (mm)
Cost Rp/m2
0.5
(HRS)
1.5 Not
required
1.0
HRS
1.3 Not
required
1.8 30 45,000 1.5 30 45,000
2.0 30 45,000 1.8 40 58,751
2.3 35 52,500 2.0 55 85,313
2.5 45 68,935 2.3 70 108,742
3.0 7068 101,531 2.5 85 129,700
3.0 110 165,967
2
(ACf)
0.8 Not
required
5
(ACf)
0.8 Not
required
1.0 40 54,000 1.0 40 54,000
1.3 50 70,200 1.3 50 70,200
1.5 85 114,075 1.5 85 114,075
1.8 110 149,175 1.8 110 149,175
2.0 140 184,275 2.0 140 184,275
2.4 165 224,640 2.4 165 224,640
3.0 200 270,000 3.0 200 270,000
10
(ACc)
0.8 not
required
30
(ACc)
0.5 40 54,000
1.0 40 54,000 0.8 100 135,000
1.3 65 87,750 1.0 150 202,500
1.5 100 131,625
1.3 190 256,500
1.8 145 192,375 1.5 220 297,000
2.0 150 201,825 1.8 240 324,000
PROVINCIAL AND KABUPATEN ROAD MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PLANNING
15
CHAPTER 3: ASSUMPTIONS AND CAUSAL FACTOR TREATMENTS
CCFxCESA (106)
and Asphalt
Type
Benkelman Beam
Deflection (mm)
Overlay (mm)
Cost Rp/m2
CCFxCESA (106)
and Asphalt
Type
Benkelman Beam
Deflection (mm)
Overlay (mm)
Cost Rp/m2
2.3 170 228,150 2.0 270 364,500
2.4 180 242,190 2.3 290 391,500
2.5 230 310,500 2.5 300 405,000
50
(ACc)
0.5 60 81,000
100
(ACc)
0.5 80 108,000
0.8 120 162,000 0.8 150 202,500
1.0 170 229,500 1.0 200 270,000
1.3 210 283,500 1.3 230 310,500
1.5 240 324,000 1.5 260 351,000
1.8 260 351,000 1.8 290 391,500
2.0 290 391,500 2.0 310 418,500
2.3 310 418,500 2.3 330 445,500
2.5 320 432,000 2.5 350 472,500
200
(AC c)
0.5 100 135,000
Note:
Red cells in Chart 7 indicate possible trigger points to be verified by life cycle cost analysis. Low values indicate possibility to defer rehabilitation. High values indicate that reconstruction solutions are likely to be of more cost effective than overlay. The triggers might provide useful guidance for planning and design decisions when defined quantitatively by whole-of-life analysis.
0.8 180 243,000
1.0 220 297,000
1.3 260 351,000
1.5 290 391,500
1.8 320 432,000
2.0 340 459,000
2.3 360 486,000
2.5 380 513,000
16 INTERIM PAVEMENT DESIGN AND COST CHARTS
ROAD SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME PACKAGE 3 ACTIVITY NO. 201
Chart 1
1. For embankment not built under the same contract and all at grade and cutting areas - see Specifications for sub-grade improvement of new embankments
2. Treat top of cap as CBR 2.5 and provide sub-grade improvement layer as for SG2.5
3. Add micro-pile treatment if DCP depth to CBR 2 insitu exceeds 3m (geotechnical investigation required)
4. Void
5. Laboratory CBR is not applicable. See Foundation Module
6. Commonly alluvial silty clay <1 percent CBR insitu when saturated, normally consolidated
Chart 2
1. See CHART 1 for Foundation Structure
2. DGH Specification rules for layer thickness and material type are satisfied
3. AC Base thickness determined to limit crack propagation. Consider SAMI to reduce AC Base thickness requirement
4. Solutions generally satisfy AASHTO, Austroads 2008, CIRCLY and ORN 31 design rules
Chart 5 and 6
1. Charts 5 and 6 provide a basis for preliminary design of recycled pavements. Solutions require an adequate sub-base and sub-grade platform. Refer to Chart 6 for minimum values.
2. The recycled base thickness chosen depends on a number of practical constraints including existing asphalt thickness, proposed treatment width and ratio of new materials required
PROVINCIAL AND KABUPATEN ROAD MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PLANNING
17
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION
Charts 1–7 together with causal factor adjustments provided by Section 3.4, permit life cycle cost analysis of most pavement design cases. Appropriate cost analyses will provide a basis for determination of design life, selection of new construction or rehabilitation type and other warrants.