1104

Part 5

Materials and Pavements

Design Procedure
The objective of the design is to determine the thickness of the concrete pavement
that is adequate to carry the projected design ESAL. The basic equation developed in
the 1986 AASHTO design guide for the pavement thickness is given as
log10 W18  ZRSo  7.35 log10 1D  12  0.06 
 14.22  0.32Pt 2 log10 e

log10 3 PSI>14.5  1.52 4

1  3 11.624  107 2>1D  12 8.46 4

ScCd
D.75  1.132
a .75
b f (20.21)
215.63J D  318.42>1Ec>k2 .25 4

where
ZR  standard normal variant corresponding to the selected level of reliability
So  overall standard deviation (see Chapter 19)
W18  predicted number of 18 kip ESAL applications that can be carried by
the pavement structure after construction
D  thickness of concrete pavement to the nearest half-inch
PSI  design serviceability loss  pi  pt
pi  initial serviceability index
pt  terminal serviceability index
Ec  elastic modulus of the concrete to be used in construction (lb/in2)
Sc  modulus of rupture of the concrete to be used in construction (lb/in2)
J  load transfer coefcient  3.2 (assumed)
Cd  drainage coefcient

Table 20.8 ESAL Factors for Rigid Pavements, Tandem Axles, and pt of 2.5
Slab Thickness, D (in.)
Axle
Load (kip)
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24

6
.0001
.0006
.002
.007
.015
.031
.057
.097
.155
.234
.340
.475

7
.0001
.0006
.002
.006
.014
.028
.052
.089
.143
.220
.325
.462

8
.0001
.0005
.002
.006
.013
.026
.049
.084
.136
.211
.313
.450

9
.0001
.0005
.002
.005
.013
.026
.048
.082
.133
.206
.308
.444

10

11

12

13

14

.0001
.0005
.002
.005
.012
.025
.047
.081
.132
.204
.305
.441

.0001
.0005
.002
.005
.012
.025
.047
.081
.131
.203
.304
.440

.0001
.0005
.002
.005
.012
.025
.047
.080
.131
.203
.303
.439

.0001
.0005
.002
.005
.012
.025
.047
.080
.131
.203
.303
.439

.0001
.0005
.002
.005
.012
.025
.047
.080
.131
.203
.303
.439
(Continued)

Chapter 20

Design of Rigid Pavements

1105

Table 20.8 ESAL Factors for Rigid Pavements, Tandem Axles, and pt of 2.5 (continued )
Slab Thickness, D (in.)
Axle
Load (kip)
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
90

.644
.855
1.11
1.43
1.82
2.29
2.85
3.52
4.32
5.26
6.36
7.64
9.11
10.8
12.8
15.0
17.5
20.3
23.5
27.0
31.0
35.4
40.3
45.7
51.7
58.3
65.5
73.4
82.0
91.4
102.0
113.0
125.0

7
.637
.854
1.12
1.44
1.82
2.27
2.80
3.42
4.16
5.01
6.01
7.16
8.50
10.0
11.8
13.8
16.0
18.5
21.4
24.6
28.1
32.1
36.5
41.4
46.7
52.6
59.1
66.2
73.9
82.4
92.0
102.0
112.0

8
.627
.852
1.13
1.47
1.87
2.35
2.91
3.55
4.30
5.16
6.14
7.27
8.55
10.0
11.7
13.6
15.7
18.1
20.8
23.8
27.1
30.9
35.0
39.6
44.6
50.2
56.3
62.9
70.2
78.1
87.0
96.0
106.0

9
.622
.850
1.14
1.49
1.92
2.43
3.03
3.74
4.55
5.48
6.53
7.73
9.07
10.6
12.3
14.2
16.3
18.7
21.4
24.4
27.6
31.3
35.3
39.8
44.7
50.1
56.1
62.5
69.6
77.3
86.0
95.0
105.0

10
.620
.850
1.14
1.50
1.95
2.48
3.12
3.87
4.74
5.75
6.90
8.21
9.68
11.3
13.2
15.2
17.5
20.0
22.8
25.8
29.2
32.9
37.0
41.5
46.4
51.8
57.7
64.2
71.2
78.9
87.0
96.0
106.0

11
.619
.850
1.14
1.51
1.96
2.51
3.16
3.94
4.86
5.92
7.14
8.55
10.14
11.9
13.9
16.2
18.6
21.4
24.4
27.7
31.3
35.2
39.5
44.2
49.3
54.9
60.9
67.5
74.7
82.4
91.0
100.0
110.0

12
.618
.849
1.14
1.51
1.97
2.52
3.18
3.98
4.91
6.01
7.28
8.75
10.42
12.3
14.5
16.8
19.5
22.5
25.7
29.3
33.2
37.5
42.1
47.2
52.7
58.6
65.0
71.9
79.4
87.4
96.0
105.0
115.0

13
.618
.849
1.14
1.51
1.97
2.52
3.20
4.00
4.95
6.06
7.36
8.86
10.58
12.5
14.8
17.3
20.1
23.2
26.7
30.5
34.7
39.3
44.3
49.8
55.7
62.1
69.0
76.4
84.4
93.0
102.0
112.0
123.0

14
.618
.849
1.14
1.51
1.97
2.53
3.20
4.01
4.96
6.09
7.40
8.92
10.66
12.7
14.9
17.5
20.4
23.6
27.3
31.3
35.7
40.5
45.9
51.7
58.0
64.8
72.3
80.2
88.8
98.1
108.0
119.0
130.0

SOURCE: Adapted from AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Ofcials, Washington, D.C., 1993. Used with permission.

Equation 20.21 can be solved for the thickness of the pavement (D) in inches
by using either a computer program or the two charts in Figures 20.13 and 20.14
(page 1108). The use of a computer program facilitates the iteration necessary, since
D has to be assumed to determine the effective modulus of subgrade reaction and the
ESAL factors used in the design.

1106

Part 5

Materials and Pavements

Table 20.9 Recommended Values for Drainage Coefcient, Cd, for Rigid Pavements
Percent of Time Pavement Structure is Exposed
to Moisture Levels Approaching Saturation
Quality of
Drainage

Less Than 1%

15%

525%

Greater Than
25%

Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Very poor

1.2 1.20
1.20 1.15
1.15 1.10
1.10 1.00
1.00 0.90

1.20 1.15
1.15 1.10
1.10 1.00
1.00 0.90
0.90 0.80

1.15 1.10
1.10 1.00
1.00 0.90
0.90 0.80
0.80 0.70

1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70

SOURCE: Adapted from AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Ofcials, Washington, D.C., 1993. Used with permission.

Figure 20.13 Design Chart for Rigid Pavements Based on Using Values for Each Input
Variable (Segment 1)
SOURCE: Redrawn from AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Ofcials, Washington, D.C., 1993. Used with permission.

Example 20.3 Designing a Rigid Pavement Using the AASHTO Method

The use of the charts is demonstrated with the example given in Figure 20.13. In this
case, input values for Segment 1 of the chart (Figure 20.13) are
Effective modulus of subgrade reaction, k  72 lb/in3
Mean concrete modulus of rupture, Sc  650 lb/in2
Load transfer coefcient, J  3.2
Drainage coefcient, Cd  1.0

Chapter 20

Design of Rigid Pavements

1107

These values are used to determine a value on the match line as shown in
Figure 20.13 (solid line ABCDEF). Input parameters for Segment 2 (Figure 20.14)
of the chart are
Match line value determined in segment 1 (74)
Design serviceability loss, PSI  4.5  2.5  2.0
Reliability, R%  95% (ZR  1.645)
Overall standard deviation, So  0.29
Cumulative 18 kip ESAL  (5  106)

Solution: The required thickness of the concrete slab is then obtained, as shown in
Figure 20.14, as 10 in. (nearest half-inch).
Note that when the thickness obtained from solving Eq. 20.21 analytically or by
use of Figures 20.13 and 20.14 is signicantly different from that originally assumed
to determine the effective subgrade modulus and to select the ESAL factors, the
whole procedure has to be repeated until the assumed and designed values are
approximately the same, emphasizing the importance of using a computer program
to facilitate the necessary iteration.

Example 20.4 Evaluating the Adequacy of a Rigid Pavement Using the AASHTO Method
Using the data and effective subgrade modulus obtained in Example 20.2, determine
whether the 9 in. pavement design of Example 20.2 will be adequate on a rural
expressway for a 20-year analysis period and the following design criteria
Pi  4.5
Pt  2.5
ESAL on design lane during rst year of operation  0.2  106
Trafc growth rate  4%
Concrete elastic modulus, Ec  5  106 lb/in2
Mean concrete modulus of rupture  700 lb/in2
Drainage conditions are such that Cd  1.0
R  0.95 (ZR  1.645)
So  0.30 (for rigid pavements So  0.3  0.4)
Growth factor  29.78 (from Table 19.6)
k  170 (from Example 20.2)
Assume D  9 in. (from Example 20.2)
ESAL over design period  0.2  106  29.78  6  106

Solution: The depth of concrete required is obtained from Figures 20.13 and
20.14. The dashed lines represent the solution, and a depth of 9 in. is obtained. The
pavement is therefore adequate.

1108

Part 5

Materials and Pavements

Figure 20.14 Design Chart for Rigid Pavements Based on Using Mean Values for Each Input Variable
(Segment 2)
SOURCE: Redrawn from AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Ofcials, Washington, D.C., 1993. Used with permission.