LAMWO DISTRIC LOCAL GOVERNMENT

DRAFT DESIGN REPORT FOR THE DESIGN OF LAMWO

HEADQUARTER ROADS AND HILLARY ONEK ROAD

THE ROADS ARE TO BE SEALED WITH FUNDING FROM GOVERNMENT OF

UGANDA WITH SUPPORT FROM DANIDA UNDER THE RTI PROGRAM
Table of Contents
1.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background.......................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Structure of the report.......................................................................................... 1
1.4 Low cost sealing................................................................................................... 1
1.5 Project area.......................................................................................................... 2
2.0 Field surveys......................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Preliminary survey............................................................................................. 4
2.2 Geometrical and topographical survey..............................................................4
2.3 Road Condition assessment..............................................................................4
2.4 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) test............................................................4
2.5 Traffic Count...................................................................................................... 4
2.6 Material sampling.............................................................................................. 4
3.0 Analysis of Data................................................................................................ 2
3.1 Geometrical survey........................................................................................... 2
3.1.1 Horizontal alignment................................................................................... 2
3.1.2 Vertical Alignment....................................................................................... 2
3.1.3 Cross Sections............................................................................................. 3
3.2 Road condition Assessment............................................................................... 3
3.3 Traffic Survey..................................................................................................... 3
3.3.1 Equivalent Standards Axles (ESA)...............................................................4
3.3.2 Traffic projection.......................................................................................... 5
3.3.4 Sensitivity analysis...................................................................................... 6
3.4 Climatic assessment.......................................................................................... 6
3.5 DCP analysis...................................................................................................... 8
3.6 Geotechnical Investigation.................................................................................11
3.6.1 Subgrade................................................................................................... 11
3.6.2 Gravel results............................................................................................ 11
4.0 Design................................................................................................................ 14
4.1 Geometric design............................................................................................ 14

Page 1 of 46
 4.1.1 Design speed............................................................................................ 14
4.1.2 Cross section............................................................................................. 14
4.1.3 Vertical and horizontal alignment..............................................................14
4.2 Drainage considerations..................................................................................14
4.2.1 Road camber............................................................................................. 14
4.2.2 Side drains................................................................................................ 14
4.2.3 Cross drains.............................................................................................. 14
4.3 Pavement Design............................................................................................ 15
4.3.1 Weinert Number........................................................................................ 15
4.3.2 Design Traffic Class................................................................................... 16
4.3.3 Subgrade Class......................................................................................... 17
4.3.4 Pavement Layer Selection.........................................................................18
4.4 Surface Design................................................................................................ 20
Appendix A: Drawings............................................................................................. 27
Appendix B: DCP Test Results................................................................................... 40
Appendix C: Lab Results.......................................................................................... 45

Table of Tabl
Table 3. 3. 1: Results of traffic survey at the first turn to the Lamwo Headquarter
offices......................................................................................................................... 4
Table 3. 3. 2 Results of traffic survey at the second turn to the Lamwo District
Headquarter offices.................................................................................................... 4
Table 3. 3. 3: ESA values for the different vehicle categories.....................................5
Table 3. 3. 4: Estimation of Daily Equivalent Standard Axle at Chainage 0+140........5
Table 3. 3. 5: Projection of Cumulative ESA at different design period and traffic
growth rate............................................................................................................... 6Y
Table 3.4. 1: climate table or historical weather data of Kitgum.

Table 3.5. 1: DCP Section Properties of Hillary Onek Road..........................................9

Table 3.5. 2 Test summary report for Hillary Onek Road.............................................9
Table 3.5. 3: DCP Section Properties of Lamwo DLG HDQT road...............................10
Table 3.5. 4: Test Summary Report of Lamwo DLG HDQT road 1

Table 4.2 1: Cross drainage intervals 1

Page 2 of 46
Table 4.3. 1: Indicative Weinert N Values..................................................................15
Table 4.3. 2 Traffic Bands.......................................................................................... 16
Table 4.3. 3: Pavement Design Life Selection Guidance...........................................16
Table 4.3. 4: Factors for Design Traffic Loading.........................................................17
Table 4.3. 5: Subgrade Class.................................................................................... 17
Table 4.3. 6: Design percentile.................................................................................17
Table 4.3. 7: Design Subgrade class for the roads....................................................18
Table 4.3. 8: Design parameters 1

Table 4.4. 1: Grading requirements for Aggregate for surfacing...............................22

Table 4.4. 2: Weighting Factor for Surface Treatment design....................................22

Table of Figur

No table of figures entries found.Y

Figure 2.6. 1: Excavation of pits during gravel sampling

Figure 3.1. 1: Road profile Lamwo HDQT Road (Link1 1 st turn from Padibe) Road.......2
Figure 3.1. 2: Road profile of Lamwo HDQT Road (Link2 2 nd turn from Padibe)...........3
Figure 3.1. 3: Road profile of Hillary Onek road

Figure 3.4. 1: Climate Graph kitgum...........................................................................7

Figure 3.4. 2 : Temperature Graph Kitgum

Figure 3.5. 1 Cumulative percentiles of CBR values of Hillary Onek Roads.................9

Figure 3.5. 2 Cummulative Percentiles for CBR value of Lamwo DLG HDQT Road
1

Figure 3.6. 1: Grading Curves for Gravel material 1

Figure 4.3. 1: Pavement design of Hillary Onek and Lamwo DLG HDQT Roads.........18

List of Acronyms

Page 3 of 46
AASTHO American Association of State Highways and
Transportation Engineers

ADT Average Daily Traffic

DCP Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

DANIDA Danish International Development Aid

CBR California Bearing Ratio

ESA Equivalent Standard Axle

LCS Low Cost Sealing

MDD Maximum Dry Density

MELTC Mt. Elgon Labour Based Training Centre

SN Structural Number

Page 4 of 46
1.1 Introduction
This is a report of the design of Lamwo Headquarter road and Hillary Onek Road in
Lamwo District. The roads are to be upgraded to paved standard using the Low Cost
Sealing technology. The report presents the process leading to the design of the
roads, which involved collection of field data, analysis and eventually design. The
process was based on a number of manuals such as Road design manual for the
Ministry of Works and Transport, the Low Cost Sealing Manual for Low Volume roads
and the Ethiopian Road design manual for Low Volume roads.

1.2 Background
In 2009, the Government of Uganda with support from DANIDA launched the U-
Growth Program, a five year program, in 23 district in eastern and northern Uganda.
The districts comprised Bukedea, Kumi, Ngora, Serere, Soroti, Amuria, Katakwi,
Dokolo, Kaberamaido, Amolata, Lira, Alebtong, Otuke, Oyam, Kole, Apac, Gulu,
Nwoya, Amuru, Lamwo, Kitgum, Pader and Agago. Among the three components of
the U-Growth Program was the Rural Transport Infrastructure (RTI) whose objective
was to improve economic development through improved accessibility to
agricultural products and markets. One of its key outputs was the introduction of
Low Cost Sealing (LCS) technology and upgrading of 300km of district roads to
sealed standards using the LCS technology. In 2010, the LCS was introduced at
MELTC and after successfully being trialed at the demonstration road in Mbale and in
the 23 districts; the districts started rolling it out on their district roads. By June
2016 according to the RTI report by the Ministry of Works and Transport, about
46km of roads had been upgraded to sealed standards with LCS.

The U-Growth program ended in June 2016. However, due to some unaccomplished
targets, especially for RTI component yet funding for those activities was still
available with the Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development (MFPED),
the execution of the activities were extended until June 2018. Accordingly, this
financial year 2016/2017, Lamwo District planned to construct 1 km of road to
paved standard using LCS technology. And following a council decision of the .th
seating, Lamwo Headquarter road and Hillary Onek Road were selected for sealing.
To expedite the design process, it was thought prudent to internally conduct the
road design but with support from MELTC.

1.3 Structure of the report

The report is structure into section with the first section being the introduction.
Section two is about field surveys conducted which is followed by section 3 about
data analysis. Lastly, the report ends with section 4 presenting the design of the
roads.

Page 1 of 46
1.4 Low cost sealing
Low Cost Sealing is defined as appropriate sealing of low volume roads while
optimizing the use of locally available materials. By low volume roads, means roads
carrying less than 300 vehicles per day and less than one Million Equivalent
Standard Axles (MESA). Conventionally roads of this nature would not qualify for
sealing using the available methods of project appraisal due to low values of
economic returns. However, new research has shown that it is justifiable to seal
roads with traffic levels less than 100 vehicles per day following the design
approach adopted for Low volume Roads. Whereas on highly trafficked roads the
predominant factors contributing to stress development is due the traffic loads, on
low volume roads, the predominant factors are environment related. Accordingly,
the design approach for highly traffic roads is not perfectly suitable for low volume
roads.

Benefits of low cost sealing

The design. The design approach is based on insitu strength of the subgrade.
Over time due to effect of traffic, the soils underneath the road base undergo
consolidation and gains strength. It is this consolidation which leads to
thinner pavement layer with relatively lower material specifications;

Use of local materials: Design standards have been broadened to cater for
low volume trafficked roads. Accordingly, the materials required for use on
Low Volume Sealed roads are of lower specification compared to those for
high traffic roads. By this, a lot of locally available materials, which would
otherwise not qualify for use on high volume roads, are made use of. This
does not only reduce the transportation cost but also realizes lower cost in
the materials, local materials are generally cheaper;

The method of work involves use of a mix of labour and light equipments.
Substituting labour for equipment has a lot of advantages among which
include reduced costs, creation of employment, and reduced foreign
exchange; and

Reduction on gravel demand: Continued use of gravel for surfacing of

unpaved roads is unsustainable as most of the good gravel sources are
getting depleted. Sealing of these roads prolongs the life of the road and
preserves the gravel material on the road for long time.

1.5 Project area

The site is located in Lamwo district at the district headquarters along Padibe
Lukung road. Lamwo district is the last district at the border with Southern Sudan in
the north. It is bordered by Kitgum district in the south, Kotido district in the east

Page 2 of 46
and Gulu district in the west. Figures 1.5.1 and figure 1.5.2 shows the location of
Lamwo District headquarters and location of the roads respectively.

Project
location

Figure 1.5. 1: Map showing location of Lamwo district

The roads selected are located within the town council. The map below shows the
four roads distinguished by the red colours as shown.

Page 3 of 46
Figure 1.5. 2: Map showing the location of the roads
2.0 Field surveys
The field surveys conducted include preliminary survey, geometrical survey, road
condition survey, DCP test and sampling of gravel, subgrade soil and aggregates.

2.1 Preliminary survey

This involved traversing through the entire road making observation of the
topography, vegetation, developments, and economic activities along the road.
Information from the preliminary survey was used to plan the detailed survey
including selection of the horizontal alignment.

2.2 Geometrical and topographical survey

Geometrical survey involved the design of road alignment that is compliant with the
standards while at the same time minimizing physical destruction and earth works.
Topographical survey was conducted to determine the road profile and road cross
sections using a dumpy level. Levels for the road profile were taken at intervals of
20 metres while cross sections were taken at intervals of 50 metres. The exercise
started by establishing a Temporary Bench Mark (TBN) at the culvert across Padibe
Lokung road.

2.3 Road Condition assessment

This was done to assess the condition of the road to help design appropriate
interventions. It involved walking along the road recording the condition at intervals
of 20 metres. Parameters recorded included road geometry, drainage condition,
road surface type and condition, structure locations and conditions, possible

Page 4 of 46
locations of new structures, special drainage structures and their condition, gravel
depth, crown height and vegetation cover in the road verge.

2.4 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) test

This was done to assess the strength of the existing pavement layers. The test was
done using a DCP equipment. The test involved driving the shaft with a 60 degree
cone at the end into the ground using a hammer of 8 kg falling freely through a
height of 575mm. The test was conducted to a depth of at least 600 mm at intervals
of 25 metres staggered at the centre, left hand side and right hand side. Figure
2.4.1 shows the conduction of DCP test in progress.

2.5 Traffic Count

Traffic count was conducted for three days at two stations along Lamwo
Headquarter road. One station was at first turn and another station was at the
second turn to the District Headquarter Offices off Padibe Lokung road. The
exercise involved tallying by category vehicles passing the location for 12 hours
each day.

2.6 Material sampling

Samples for gravel, subgrade soil and aggregates were sampled and delivered to
Mbale Regional Material Laboratory for testing. Gravel samples were picked from
one quarry at the Lanungu quarry. The gravel was tested for Atteberg limits,
gradation, compaction, soaked CBR and Lime stabilization. Figure 2.6.1 show the
excavation of pits for gravel sampling.

Page 5 of 46
Three subgrade samples were picked.
One at chainage 0+200 on Lamwo
Headquarter road, and two on Hillary
Onek road at chainages 0+250 and
0+450. The samples were to be tested
for Atteberg limits, compaction and
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) both at
soaked conditions and at optimum
moisture content.

Figure 2.6. 1: Excavation of pits during

gravel sampling

The aggregate sample was picked from Dokolo quarry where aggregates being used
for sealing of the other council roads are sourced. The aggregates shall be tested for
Aggregate Crushing Value (ACV), Aggregate Impact Value (AIV) and bitumen affinity.

3.0 Analysis of Data

3.1 Geometrical survey

Geometric alignment is the layout of the road within the terrain. This comprise of
horizontals alignment, vertical alignment and cross section.

3.1.1 Horizontal alignment

Horizontal alignment is the birds eye view of the road. It comprises of curves and
straight lines. From the data collected, all the different road sections lay on a
straight line.

3.1.2 Vertical Alignment

Vertical alignment is the alignment of the road profile as viewed from the sides. It
consists of straight grades, crests and sags. From the plotted road profile shown in
figures 3.2.1 through figure 3.1.3, it can be noted that all the three road sections are
on a rolling terrain with average vertical gradients of about 3.5%.

Page 6 of 46
 Road profile Lamwo HDQT Road (Link1 1st turn)
1040
1020
1000
Elevation

Road Chainage

Figure 3.1. 1: Road profile Lamwo HDQT Road (Link1 1st turn from Padibe) Road

Road Profile Lamwo HDQT road (Link2 2nd turn)

1040
1030
1020
Elevation 1010

Road Chainage

Figure 3.1. 2: Road profile of Lamwo HDQT Road (Link2 2nd turn from Padibe)

Road Profile of Hillary Onek road

1025
1020
1015
1010
Elevation
1005

Chainage

Figure 3.1. 3: Road profile of Hillary Onek road

3.1.3 Cross Sections

Cross sections were taken at intervals of 50 m on each of the roads. Drawings of the
cross section are attached at the back of this report.

3.2 Road condition Assessment

Condition assessment shows that:

The existing carriageway width is on average 6m;

Page 7 of 46
 Side drains exist on all the roads;
There was n signs of siltation;
The existing camber is both steep at some sections and flat at some sections
necessitating reshaping of the roads to the required camber;
There were rock outcrops near the police post on HDQT link 2 road and at
about chainage 0+150 on HDQT link 1 road;
There were few culverts crossing on the roads.

3.3 Traffic Survey

The results of the 5 day traffic count are presented in the tables below. A 5 day
traffic count was considered instead of the 7 day count owing to the low traffic
volume on the road as can seen from tables 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. Counting was
conducted at two stations, one at first turn to the headquarter offices from Padibe
and another at the second turn to Lamwo Headquarter offices off Padibe Lokung
Road. It can be noted that the traffic at the second turn was higher than that at the
first turn. So for design purposes, traffic at the second turn has been considered.

Table 3. 3. 1: Results of traffic survey at the first turn to the Lamwo Headquarter
offices
Location First Turn off Padibe Lokung road
Medium
Small Trucks (2 Heavy
Small Truck (2 Axles with Heavy Truck (4 or
Motorcycle Car buses + axle single Large twin rear Trucks (3 more Others
Vehicle Class s (taxi) Jeeps etc rear tyres) Buses tyre) Axles) Axles) (specify)
1 81 21 7
Day 1 0 0 0 0
2 42 15 5
Day 2 0 0 0 0
3 65 15 2
Day 3 0 0 0 0
4 26 22 1
Day 4 0
5 123 41 7
Day 5 0
Total for 5 15 337 114 22
days 0 0
Factored 19.5 438.1 148.2 28.6
total x1.3
ADT=(facto
red
total/5days 3.9 87.62 29.64 5.72
)

Table 3. 3. 2 Results of traffic survey at the second turn to the

Lamwo District Headquarter offices
Location Second turn off Padibe Lokung road
Small Medium
Small Truck (2 Trucks (2 Heavy Heavy
buses axle Axles with Trucks Truck (4 Others
Vehicle Car + Jeeps single rear Large twin rear (3 or moe (specify
Class Motorcycles (taxi) etc tyres) Buses tyre) Axles) Axles) )

Page 8 of 46
 1 90 41 6
Day 1
2 102 40 0
Day 2
3 101 72 3
Day 3
4 112 22 4
Day 4
5 18 64 10
Day 5
Total for 5 15 423 239 23
days
Factored 19.5 549.9 310.7 29.9
total x1.3
ADT=(fa
ctored
total/7da 3.9 109.98 62.14 5.98
ys)

3.3.1 Equivalent Standards Axles (ESA)

Traffic traversing on the road is of different loading. For design purpose, and in
accordance with the Ministry of Works and Transport design manual, a standard load
of 8 tons per axle was considered. The different axle loading for the different
vehicles was then converted to reflect the effect relative to the standard load using
the ESA values. The ESA values per vehicle category as per the Ethiopian Pavement
Design Manual are presented in table 3.3.3.

Table 3. 3. 3: ESA values for the different vehicle categories

Clas Type No of Average ESA Average ESA per
s axles per vehicle all vehicle half
loaded loaded
A Car 2
B Pick-up/ 4-wheel drive 2
C Small bus 2 0.3 0.15
D Bus/Coach 2 2.0 1.0
E Small Trucks 2 1.5 0.7
F Truck 2 5 2.5
G Large Truck 2 10 5
H Tractor 3
2-axled Trailer 4 12 6
3-axled trailer 5 15 7.5
4-axled trailer 6 18 9

Because traffic is really fully loaded in both directions, the ESA values for half
loaded were considered for the analysis. Accordingly, the table below shows the
estimation of the average total Daily Equivalent Standards Axles (DESA).

Table 3. 3. 4: Estimation of Daily Equivalent Standard Axle at Chainage 0+140

Location Oryem John Bosco Road at Ch 0+140

Page 9 of 46
 Small
Small Truck (2 Medium
buses axle Trucks (2 Heavy Heavy
+ single Axles with Trucks Truck (4 or
Motorcycle Car Jeeps rear Large twin rear (3 more Others
Vehicle Class s (taxi) etc tyres) Buses tyre) Axles) Axles) (specify)
ADT=(factor 109.9
ed 3.9 8 62.14 5.98
total/7days)
ESA
Value/Vehicl
e 0 0.0 0.15 0.7
DESA
Value
/vehicle 0 0 9.321 4.186
Total DESA 13.507

3.3.2 Traffic projection

Traffic projection was conducted to estimate the cumulative number of Equivalent
Standard Axles to be subjected to the road for its design period. The projection was
conducted using the formula:

] [( ) ] ..
x+ y y

[ A 365 100
R
1+
R
100 ) ( 1+
R
100

3.3.1

Where A = Total ESA / day of DESA;

R = Traffic growth rate;

x = design life in years; and

y = number of years before start of design life.

3.3.4 Sensitivity analysis

Using equation 3.3.1, the cumulative axles were calculated for the different growth
rate and design period and the results are presented in the table below.

Table 3. 3. 5: Projection of Cumulative ESA at different design period and traffic

growth rate
Design Traffic growth
period
1 2 3 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7

5 25148 25656 26174 26703 26971 27242 27515 27791 28070 2835
6 30330 31099 31890 32701 33115 33534 33958 34389 34825 3526
7 35563 36651 37776 38939 39535 40141 40756 41382 42018 4266
8 40849 42315 43840 45427 46244 47078 47928 48795 49679 5058

Page 10 of 46
9 46187 48091 50085 52174 53255 54362 55494 56653 57839 5905
10 51579 53983 56518 59191 60582 62010 63476 64982 66528 6811
11 57025 59992 63143 66488 68238 70040 71897 73811 75783 7781
12 62525 66122 69967 74078 76239 78472 80782 83170 85639 8819
13 68081 72375 76997 81971 84599 87326 90155 93090 96135 9929
14 73692 78752 84237 90180 93336 96622 100043 103605 107314 1111
15 79359 85257 91694 98717 102467 106384 110476 114752 119219 1238

3.4 Climatic assessment

The climate data of Lamwo could not be obtained and so data of Kitgum district, the
nearest to Lamwo was used. According to Climate-Data.org at their website
https://en.climate-data.org, the climate of Kitgum was described as follow.

The climate of Kitgum is tropical. When compared with winter, the summers have
much more rainfall. This climate is considered to be Aw according to the Kppen-
Geiger climate classification. The temperature averages 24.1 C. About 1125 mm of
precipitation falls annually. Figure 3.4.1 shows the climate graph of Kitgum.

Figure 3.4. 1: Climate Graph kitgum

Page 11 of 46
The driest month is January. There is 9 mm of precipitation in January. In August, the
precipitation reaches its peak, with an average of 171 mm. Figure 3.4.2 shows the
climate table or historical weather data of Kitgum.

Table 3.4. 1: climate table or historical weather data of Kitgum.

Figure 3.4. 2 : Temperature Graph Kitgum

With an average of 26.1 C, February is the warmest month. At 22.7 C on average,

July is the coldest month of the year.

The total annual rainfall is 9mm + 24mm + 61mm + 129mm + 147mm + 129mm +
158mm + 171mm + 112mm + 95mm + 61mm + 29mm = 1125mm

3.5 DCP analysis

The DCP data was analysed using UKDCP software version 3.1. During the analysis,
three layers were selected. The top most layer was treated as a sub-base while the

Page 12 of 46
 lower two layers were both treated as subgrade. Having two layers as subgrade is
advantageous that the weaker spots can be isolated. Further, the results from the
software, cumulative frequency curves were drawn from which percentile readings
can be determined. The results are presented in the table 3.5.1 through 3.5.4 and
the cumulative percentiles presented in Figures 3.5.1 and 3.5.2.

NuU
1SeK
m teirD
bc oC
fP
onTesV
t31.9.ta5r0E.n45d0L.e4ngth(km
:0
S )9TestS
P
arR
C
B
N (m
euatbsg-r)%
S D
C P
P M r-cmTS
.5axim
de13600
auN
B
S
P vbsrefPu01Mohjenie tcc
ktc
uL023M
.3i4nm stia
eN
o.6
n(o
nse)P
m rilapryeOtnieks30021.6RR
:mH
58ecat7anin:AlTes081S
m
t.2
7D eadport821.61027.467801.15-2.7
9o
601.30th%
ile

R
eportD
ae:13-Feb2017 Page1of

Table 3.5. 1: DCP Section Properties of Hillary Onek Road

4321N
U
o.K
D
TC
ePstV
3a.1e(Ck0hm
D Ta)einstgDalisLoacraitigenw
9876511//22001166..243550C C arigew aayy-2(O m
2-..5500U TestSum
U aryR
eport
f)setSunrpfaavceedTypP
rojectN
npaved00.7.711((M
oupa
SU
M rm
isfeate
cLo:dyH
M
eirlsa ryO
naseekTyR
B po
ad(TBmhaisck)ensT(Su0mhesb6itcLk-)nayersCSu9BbRg(ra%d)eSP4NavemntSNrePngth
odeerraatt))-- --1321894960741312752370010.896.6534822..563640973
ReportD
ae:13-Feb2017 Page1of

Table 3.5. 2 Test summary report for Hillary Onek Road

Analysis of percentiles

Page 13 of 46
 Percentile of Hillary Onek Road
100

80

60
Percetile 40

20

0
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
CBR Values

U
K
N
u
m
b
e
S
e
c
1 rD
tioC
fP
o
nV
st3
T
e .:18t.arE
S
0 n
0d
50L
.3 e
0n
g
th
.3
5(k
m
)T
e
s
tP
8a
rR
C
B
S
Nme
tb
a
(S
usrg eM
-)%
d a
0
9
5
1x
im
.7
3uM
2
9
0 uLM
in
.6
1m o
ce
5
2
07
9a
tin
a
.6
3 n
D
rC
P
:A
srP
o
lT
e
sS
N
B
S
u
P
a2
1
0jefPe
tD
6
491
.5
vb 0
2
9
0t3
.6
1h
% cS
ile
-cm
T
hitnte
kN cnsm
a
ce
h t(imeo
:sn
LP
)a
m
mro
)wp
e
tiH
o
D
L
G s.7Q
D
2
0
4 R
e
rp
T
8o
r301t1.71024.45103.345-1.74
o
a
d
Figure 3.5. 1 Cumulative percentiles of CBR values of Hillary Onek Roads
R
eportD
ae:13-F
eb2017 P
age1of

Table 3.5. 3: DCP Section Properties of Lamwo DLG HDQT road

N
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
U
.K
3o
D
C
T
e
1 s
1/2
P
tV
3.a1e160(C
D
/20 0160..3
T
h
a
km
5
5C
1
2
esg
)in tD
ails
L
o
a catio
arriig
C ge
n
ew
a (O
ayy-2
w
m f)setS
-2..5500U
u
n
np
U T
estS
pa
aveum
aryR
rfavcP
ed eport
erT
do
yjp
eectN
am
0..e
U
S
M
0 up
o
7ir:s
711((L
e
faca
tM
Mom
L
od
de w
rtso
yra
e
erat))D
L-B-aG
seH
D
TQ
eT
yproad-(TB-m
h e)knsT
aisc e
(S
4
5
2
6
1
33stib
u
h
1m
0
6
9 cL ay
)-kner5
s S
C
9u
40
3
2
1
37
0
4
b
g
(r%
1B
R a)d
e0
S P
1.N
1
0
a9
.7
5
2
74vem
3
8
5
n
tS
2 Nr7e
1..4
2
n
g
th
P
70
0
R
eportD
ae:13-Feb2017 P
age1of

Table 3.5. 4: Test Summary Report of Lamwo DLG HDQT road

Page 14 of 46
Cummulative percentile of Lamwo DLG HDQT road
100

80

60
Percentile values
40

20

0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

CBR Values

Figure 3.5. 2 Cummulative Percentiles for CBR value of Lamwo DLG HDQT Road

3.6 Geotechnical Investigation

Gravel samples were collected from one source at the Lanungu quarry. Samples for
subgrade were collected at three locations, at chainage 0+200 on Lamwo
Headquarter road and at chainages 0+250 and 0+450 on Hillary Onek Road. The
selection of these locations was guided by the DCP test results to identify points of
weakness.

The samples were tested as follow:

Gravel was tested for soaked CBR, Compaction, Atterberg limits, gradation
and chemical stabilization with lime;
Subgrade Samples were tested for Soaked CBR, compaction, Atterberg limits
and gradation.

The summary of test results is presented in the table 3.6.1 below.

Table 3.6. 0: summary of test results

Test Results
Remarks
Stabilization @4%
Sample Location/ CBR (%) MDD
Compacti Gradation lime
type source
on PI (%) (grading CBR (%)
95 98 100
(kg/m3) modulus) @ 98% PI (%)
% % %
MDD
Gravel Lanungu
20 27 30 1870 19 2.13 48 13
Material quary
Subgrade Ch 0+200 4 6 7 1610 20 0.7

Page 15 of 46
 Lamwo
Headquarte
r Road
Ch
0+250,Hilla
Sample 4 5 6 1630 20 0.65
ry Onek
Road
Ch o+450,
Hillary 3 4 5 1620 17 0.65
Onek Road

More details of the test results are presented in the test report appended at the
back of this report.

3.6.1 Subgrade
The minimum soaked subgrade CBR was 5% at 100%MDD. This was lower than 9%
that was obtained using the DCP. This was expected given that the laboratory
samples were tested after 4 days of soaking. The PI for the subgrade samples was
between 17% and 20%. This means that the subgrade material is not very sensitive
to moisture changes, otherwise the PI would have been in the range of over 30%.
In accordance to the Roads manual of the Ministry of Works and Transport, the
design subgrade CBR is taken that at 100%MDD (light compaction).

3.6.2 Gravel results

3.6.2.1 Gradation
Grading requirement for material for Low volume roads are presented in the table
3.6.2 below.

Page 16 of 46
Table 3.6. 0: Grading envelopes of gravel material for Low Volume Roads

Source: Design Manual for Low Volume Roads

Grading curve of the gravel material

Upper limit 100 Lower limit envelope A (37.5mm)
90
80
70
Lower limit envelope A (20mm) Lower limit envelope A(10mm)
60
50
percentage passing
40
Envelope B Envelope C
30
20
10
Gravel grading 0
0.05 0.5 5 50

Sieve size

Page 17 of 46
Figure 3.6. 1: Grading Curves for Gravel material

As it can be noted from the figure 3.6.1, in the size range above 8mm, the gravel
material coincides with the lower limit of the Envelope A for nominal size of 20mm
whereas in the size range below 8mm, the material is a bit coarser. Accordingly, the
grading of the material is acceptable.

3.6.2.2 CBR
The CBR of the gravel is presented in table 3.6.1, the best CBR achieved was 48% at
4% lime content compacted at 98%MDD. However, with a much higher compaction,
CBR of 50% can be achieved.

3.6.2.3 Plasticity (PI)

The PI for the materials is also presented in table 3.6.1, the lowest PI obtained was
13% after stabilization with lime at percentage of 4%.

3.6.2.4 Minimum gravel property requirement for base construction

According to the design manual for low volume roads, the gravel requirement for
road base construction is as presented in table 3.6.3.

3.6. 0: Road base Gravel requirements

Class Property Upper limit of design Traffic Class
0.01M 0.05 0.1M 0.3M 0.5M 1M 3M
M
S2 Ip <12 <12 <9 <6 <6 <6 <6
PM 400 250 150 120 90 90 90
Grading B B B A A A A
S3 Ip <15 <12 <12 <9 <6 <6 <6
PM 550 320 250 180 90 90 90
Grading C (1)
B B B A A A
S4 Ip Note <15 <12 <12 <9 <9 <6
PM (2) 450 320 300 200 90 90
Grading 800 B B B B A A
D(3)
S5 Ip Note <15 <15 <12 <12 <9 <6
PM (2) 550 400 350 250 150 90
Grading n/s C (1)
B B B A A
D(3)
S6 Ip Note <18 <15 <15 <12 <9 <6
PM (2) 650 550 500 300 180 90
Grading n/s C (1)
C (1)
B A A A
D(3)
Notes:
Grading C is not permitted in wet environments or climates (N<4); grading B is
the minimum requirement
Maximum Ip = 8 x GM
Grading D is based on the grading modulus 1.65 < GM < 2.65
All base materials are natural gravels

Page 18 of 46
Subgrade are non-expansive
Separate notes are provided covering the use of laterites, calcretes (N>4) and
weather basalts
Ip Plasticity Limit
GM Grading Modulus
n/s Not specified

Source: Design Manual for Low Volume Roads

Whereas the grading of the material satisfies the grading requirements, the PI and
the PM of the material in its natural state does not. The PI and PM of the natural
material is 18 and 504 respectively. This is above the maximum requirement of 15
and 450 for PI and PM respectively.

4.0 Design
4.1 Geometric design
4.1.1 Design speed
The design speed of 50km/h was adopted in accordance with the Ministry of Works
and Transport Road Design Manual Volume 1: Geometric Design, January 2010
edition for Urban/Peri-Urban roads.

4.1.2 Cross section

A design class C for gravel, in accordance with the Ministry of Works and Transport
Road Design Manual Volume 1: Geometric Design for roads, with roadway width of
6.4m inclusive of shoulders, was considered appropriate for these roads. However,
some modifications were made as follow:

The carriageway width was increased from 4m to 4.5m and the shoulders were
reduces from 1.2 to 0.95m. This was because of low traffic levels. The camber cross
fall of 3% was adopted for design. This was increased from 2.5% to drain surface
water faster given the nature of the thin surfaces to be provided.

4.1.3 Vertical and horizontal alignment

From the results for geometric survey, it was found that the existing vertical
alignment is adequate and so there was no need for adjustment. Likewise the
horizontal alignment was found adequate as the roads were fairly straight.

4.2 Drainage considerations

Whereas the detailed drainage analysis was not conducted, the following
considerations were made in accordance with District Roads Manual.

Page 19 of 46
4.2.1 Road camber
A road camber cross fall of 3% was provided to drain water from the carriageway to
the side drain.

4.2.2 Side drains

Side drains were provided to collect water from the carriageway and adjoining land
and direct it to cross drains or to mitre drains, which would direct the water to a
safe point of disposal.

4.2.3 Cross drains

In accordance to the District Roads Manual, Cross drains in form of culverts are
supposed to be provided to collect water from the side drain and cross it to the
adjoining land. The recommended intervals between cross drains/culvert lines are
presented in table 4.2.1.

Cross drainage intervals

Table 4.2 1: Cross drainage intervals

Longitudinal profile of roadway Recommended interval
centerline (%) between cross drainage
structures (m)
2 200
3-4 150
5 135
6 120
7-8 100
9 - 10 80
11 - 12 60
Source: District Technical Manual Vol. 4 Man. A

4.3 Pavement Design

The pavement design was conducted using the design catalogue developed by TRL
for low volume roads. These catalogues are described in the Ethiopian Road
Authority Design Manual for low volume roads and in the recently developed Low
Cost Sealing design guideline for Uganda. The parameters required for design are
Weinert Number, design traffic class and subgrade class.

4.3.1 Weinert Number

The Weinert value is a climatic factor defined by the formula:

Ey
N=12
Pa

..3.4.1

Where Ey is the evaporation in the hottest month of the year; in mm and

Page 20 of 46
 Pa is the annual precipitation; in mm.

A guide of the Weinert values for various climates is shown in table 4.3.1. According
to the rainfall assessment for the project area, it was found that the annual rainfall
was 1125mm. This falls in the region of > 1000mm; hence, giving the Weinert Value
of <2.

Table 4.3. 1: Indicative Weinert N Values

Description Weinert N Value Thornthwaite Typical Mean
Moisture Index, Im Annual Rainfall
(mm)
Arid 5+ <-40 <250
Semi-arid 4 to 5 -20 to -40 250-500
Semi-arid to Sub- 2 to 4 -20 to +20 500-1000
tropical
Humid Tropical <2 +20 to +100 >1000
Source: Rational Road Drainage Design R6990 TRL

4.3.2 Design Traffic Class

The design traffic class or band is selected based on the cumulative equivalent
standard axles for the design period of the road. Six classes exist for Low Volume
Roads as presented in the table 4.3.2 below.

Table 4.3. 2 Traffic Bands

Design Class LV1 LV2 LV3 LV4 LV5 LV6/T2

CESAs <0.01 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 1.0
(millions)

To select the design MESA, two factors have to be determined, the traffic growth
rate and the design period.

According to the Design Manual, where there is no reliable data, the recommended
growth rate should be a factor of the economic growth rate for the region or country.
On average, for the last four years, the GPD of Uganda has been growing at 4.58%,
according to data from World Bank at www.data.worldbank.org. However, for this
particular project, it is not anticipated that traffic will grow at such a high rate given
that the roads lead to headquarter offices with other link beyond the offices.
Accordingly, a growth rate of 4.0% was considered as appropriate for this project.
From table 3.2.1, it can also be noted that for a particular design period, varying the
traffic growth rate doe not have significant effect on the design traffic class or band.

Page 21 of 46
Design period of 10 years was adopted. For thin surfaces and low volume trafficked
roads, the recommended design period is between 10 15 years as presented in
the table 4.3.3.

Table 4.3. 3: Pavement Design Life Selection Guidance

Design Data Importance/Level of service
Reliability Low High
Low 10 15 years 15 years
High 10 20 years 15 20 years
Source: Road Design Manual Volume III: Flexible pavement Design Manual

Higher design periods are discouraged because of the uncertainty in the projection
of traffic. Further, at high design periods, the pavement is more costly to construct
than at low design period and funds may not be there. Likewise as noted from table
3.2.1, for a particular traffic growth rate, varying the design period has no
significant effect on the design traffic class or band.

Therefore, according to Table 3.3.5, for 10 year design period at the traffic growth
rate of 4%, the cumulative equivalent standard axle is 59,191.

Further, according to the design manual, depending on the cross section of the
road, a distribution factor is applied to cater for the distribution of traffic loading on
the carriageway as per table 4.3.4.

Table 4.3. 4: Factors for Design Traffic Loading

Road Type Design Traffic Comment
Loading
Single carriageway
Paved road width 4.5 Up to twice the sum of At least the total traffic must be
m or less ESA in each direction* designed for as there will be
significant overlap in each
direction. For widths of 3.5m or
less, double the Total should be
used due to
channelization
Paved road width 80% of the sum of the To allow for considerable overlap in
4.5m to ESAs in each direction the central section of the road
6.0m
Paved road width Total ESAs in the most No overlap effectively, vehicles
more than 6.0m heavily remaining in lanes
trafficked direction
Dual Carriageway
Less than 2,000 90% of the total ESAs in The majority of heavy vehicles will
commercial vehicles the direction travel in one lane effectively
per
day in one direction

Page 22 of 46
 More than 2,000 80% of the total ESAs in The majority of heavy vehicles will
commercial vehicles the direction still
per travel in one lane effectively, but
day in one direction greater congestion leads to more
than switching
* Judicious to use double the total ESAs expected, as normally these are low
trafficked roads and this may give title difference in pavement structure.
Source: Road Design Manual Volume III: Flexible pavement design manual for the Ministry of
Works and Transport

For the selected cross section, the paved with including the shoulders is about 6.4
metres, which is more than 6 metres. A factor of 80% of traffic in both directions
was adopted for design. Therefore, the design MESA was 50% x (59,191/1000000) =
0.047. Accordingly, the design class was taken be LV2 (MESA: 0.01 0.05).

4.3.3 Subgrade Class

The subgrade class was selected based on the CBR of the subgrade. There are five
classes as presented in the table 4.3.5 below.

Table 4.3. 5: Subgrade Class

Subgrade S2 S3 S4 S5 S6
Class
CBR range 3-4 5-7 8 - 14 15 30 > 30
(%)

According to the Road Design Manual Volume III, the design subgrade CBR is the
lower 10th percentile of the tested samples. However, for Low Volume Roads, the
design guideline recommended different percentile values based on the projected
traffic. Table 4.3.6 below gives the recommended percentiles for design of low
volume roads.

Table 4.3. 6: Design percentile

Traffic Class Design CBR
0.5 1.0 MESA Lower 10th percentile
0.1 0.5 MESA Lower 15th percentile
< 0.1 MESA Lower 30th percentile

Accordingly, for this project, the 15 th percentile was adopted for design. From Figure
3.5.1 and Figure 3.5.2, the subgrade CBR is about 16% and 17% for Hillary Onek
and Lamwo HDQT roads respectively. However, in comparison with the results from
the laboratory, the soaked CBR was 5 and 6. This was far lower than that obtained
using the DCP. So as a compromise, a subgrade class S4 (CBR 8 15) was
considered for design.

Accordingly, the design subgrade classes for these roads are as presented in the
table 4.3.7 below.

Page 23 of 46
 Table 4.3. 7: Design Subgrade class for the roads
Name of Road Design Subgrade Class
Hillary Onek Road S4
Lamwo DLG HDQT Road S4

4.3.4 Pavement Layer Selection

Given the design parameters shown in the table 4.3.8 below for the roads, the
layers were selected using the shown in figures 4.3.3 and 4.3.4.

Table 4.3. 8: Design parameters

Design parameter Value/class
Hillary Onek Road Lamwo DLG HDQT
Road
Weinert Number <2 <2
Design subgrade CBR 7 8
(%)
Subgrade class S4 S4
Design period 10 10
Traffic growth rate 5 5
Design MESA 0.07 0.07
Traffic class LV2 LV2

Accordingly, the pavements layers were determined and are presented in Figures
4.3.1 and 4.3.2.

Base layer 120mm, Min CBR 45%

Sub-base 120mm, Min CBR 30%

Subgrade Subgrade CBR (8 15)%

Figure 4.3. 1: Pavement design of Hillary Onek

and Lamwo DLG HDQT Roads

Page 24 of 46
Figure 4.3. 2: Pavement design chart for N < 4

Page 25 of 46
Figure 4.3. 3 Colour keys

4.4 Surface Design

Several seal options are available for low volume roads. The guide for the selection
of the appropriate option is presented in the figure 4.4.1.

From the figure, it can be deducted that the most suitable options for these type of
road under the prevailing condition of low traffic are Sand Seal (SS), Slurry Seal (SIS)
and Single Chip seal (SCS). However, due to scarcity of good sand for sealing in the
region, only SCS (Single Surface dressing) was considered.

The design of the Single Surface Dressing involves first, determination of the
grading of the aggregates that have been identified for the sealing works. This then
is followed with determination of the Average Least Dimension (ALD) of the
aggregate particles.

The binder application rate can then be estimated using the formula

R = 0.6250 + (F*0.023) + [0.0375 + (F*0.0011)] ALD

Where F = Overall weighting factor;

ALD = The average least dimension of the chippings (mm);

R = Basic rate of spread of bitumen (kg/m2).

And the aggregates spread rate can be estimated using the formula;

Chipping application rate (kg/m ) = 1.364*ALD.

2

Page 26 of 46
Figure 4.4. 1: Guide to selection of seal option

Source: Manual for Low Volume sealed roads

The factor F is selected from the table 4.4.2. And the ALD can be determined using
the figure 4.4.2 affer determining the medium and the flakiness index of the
aggregates.

The grading requirement for surfacing aggregates is as presented in the table 4.4.1.

Page 27 of 46
Table 4.4. 1: Grading requirements for Aggregate for surfacing

Table 4.4. 2: Weighting Factor for Surface Treatment design

Description
Total traffic (all classes)
Very light 0 20 +8
Light 20 100 +4
Medium light 100 - 250 +2
Medium 250 500 0
Medium heavy 500 1500 -1
Heavy 1500 +4
Very heavy 3000 -5
3000 +
Existing surface
Untreated or primed base +6
Very lean bituminous +4
Lean bituminous 0
Average bituminous -1
Very rich bituminous -3
Climatic Conditions
Wet and cold +2
Tropical (wet and hot) +1
Temperate 0
Semi arid (hot and dry) -1
Arid (very dry and very hot -2
Type of Chippings
Round/dusty +2
Cubical 0
Flaky -2
Pre-coated with bitumen -2

Page 28 of 46
Figure 4.4. 2: Chart for determination of Average least Dimension
For this project, it was not possible to identify aggregates for use and so the design
is based on assumption that aggregates to be used shall be in accordance with the
specified grading. For SCS, the grading for nominal size of 14 mm is used and the
following assumptions have been made.

The medium size of 10 14 mm aggregates was taken to be 12mm;

Flakiness index was assumed as 25%.

Using those assumptions, from figure 4.4.2, the ALD for 10 - 14 mm aggregates was
determined to be 8.4 mm.

From the table of weighted factors, F = +2 + 6 +1 + -2 = 7

Using the formula: R = 0.6250 + (F*0.023) + [0.0375 + (F*0.0011)] ALD,

The bitumen application rate for the first layer R = 1.166 Litre/m 2;
Aggregate application rate for the first layer = 1.166 x 8.4 = 9.8litre/m 2;

Page 29 of 46
The bitumen application rate calculated are for bitumen cutback MC3000 which is
about 90% bitumen. For bitumen emulsion, the commonest being K160 which is
60% bitumen, the application rates are:

1st layer = 1.166 x 0.9/0.6 = 1.75 say 1.8 litres/m2; and

References

1) Ministry of works and transport technical manual Volume 4 Manual A

for district roads;

2) Design manual for Low Volume Roads for Ethiopian Road Authority
(ERA);

3) World bank data at www.data.worldbank.org;

4) Rational Road drainage design R6 990 TRL;

5) World weather online at www.worldweatheronline.com;

6) Climate- Data.org at en.climate-data.org/location/780530;

7) Effective Design of Low Volume Sealed roads in Tropical and sub

tropical Africa by C.S Gourley, T Toole, G. Morosiuk and J. L Hine TRL
Ltd. UK;

8) Principles and Practice of Highway Engineering by Dr. L R Kadyali and

Dr. N. B. Lal;
Appendices

Page 30 of 46
Appendix A: Drawings
Appendix B: DCP Test Results
U
K
teiD
N
u
m
b
S
e
c
1 rC
ofP
o
nV
st3
T
e t..1
:0
8
S a
r0
E
nd
.3L
e
50n
g
th
.3
5(k
m
)8
T
e
stS
P
a
D
C
P
rR
C
B
Nme
tb
a
(S
u P
rPSBo
jvbsre
-r)%
sgN
u
a d M
a
0
9
e%1
5x
im
.7
3
P cTcS
u0
feM uLo0
i.1
2
9
-m n
m
6 M
5
7
2
.9e
thinN
ce
a
a
6
3 cc
a
tin
n
ktTsit
m
:A
lT
e
e
s0
S
2
1in(:o
ke
tD
6
.4
51
0
2th
.6
9
901
3%
n
L
ile
se
m P
r)o
)(a
m
w
m p
e
tiH
o
D
L
G sQ
D
2
0
4 R
e
rp
T
.7
8o
rt3011.71024.45103.345-1.74
o
a
d
R
eportD
ate:16-F
eb2017 P
age1of
U
.K
N
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
D
C
P
T
e
s
2
1
2
1
V
3va1.1e60(C
--tN
D
o
N
ov1 60
h
k T
e
a
m
..3
1
5
2
5
s
tg
i)nD
ea
ils
L
o
c
rra
C
a
C
a iitg
ie
g
n
w
a
e
w
a T
e
stS
u
m
a
ryR
yy-(Om
-2
2e
p
o
rt
f.5)s
.5
e
tU
0
0
S
u
rp
n
U
n
fa
p
a
c P
rTo
e
vve
a d
e
d jpe
y ctN
e a
m
e
..:7
U
S
u
M
0
0 L
p
o
1
7
1
e
rfis
a a
m
w
L
y
c
((tM
u
o
d
e
M
o
d
e
rto
rre
a
at))D
sL
-G
-BH
D
Q
T
ro
a
s
e
T
y
pa
d
B a
-(T
h)nsT
s
e
ic
mk
-4
es
tib
(S
u
h
m
0
6
1
5
3
2
9
6
1
3
L
c a
y
r9
-)k
s
n
eS
u
b
g
r(a
C
B
R
5
0
4
3
7
2
1
0
3
4
d P
)e1
% S
N
.7
0
1
05
2
a
v
e
m
n
tS
3
9
4
8
.7
rN
2
1
2.4
7e
n
g
th
P
0
.7
0
R
eportD
ate:16-F
eb2017 P
age1of
U
K
D
rC
N
u
m
b
efP
oV
st3
T
e .1
:8 PS
roe
ctc
je tiao
N n
:S
m
eu
m
a
ryG
L
a
m
w
o
D
L R
e
p
o
rro
H
D
Q
T tad Locatin:AlTest
R
eportD
ate:16-F
eb2017 R
eportduceby.P
.age1.of.....
U
K
teiD
N
u
m
b
S
e
c
1 rC
ofP
o
nV
st3
T
e t..1
:0
9
S a
r0
5E
nd
.4L
e
50n
g
th
.4(k
m
)9
T
e
stS
P
a
D
C
P
srP
rR
C
B
Nme
tb
a
(S
N
B
S
u
P
auP crS
o
-r)%
sg
fe
vb T
-m d e
je
M
a
0
6
e%1
h
in3x
im
.5 cesittkN
cc
u0
ktTM uLo0
i.3
1 n
m
4 M
3
8
2
.5in(o
ce
a
tin
a
6
7 na
:A
n
m
lT
e
s0
se
m S
1
8P
)(e
tD
r)io
:m
H
.7
20
1th
.3
60 %
p
re
la
ile
tniek302sR
yO R
e
p
o
rt8021.61027.467801.15-2.7
o
a
d
.6
9
1
R
eportD
ate:16-F
eb2017 P
age1of
U
.K
N
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
D
C
P
T
e
s
2
1
2
1
2
1-N
V
3va1.1e60(C
--tN
D
o
N
o
ovv1
1 60
6
h
k
.3
01
.2
T
e
a
5
5
.4
5
s
tg
i)n
m D
ea
ils
L
o
c
rra
C
a
C
a
C
a
itg
riig
ig
n
e
w
a (O
yy2
e
w
a
e
w
ay2
f.5
m
--2 .5
s
e
0
0
0T
e
stS
tU
).5S
u
rp
n
U
n
U
np
pu
m
a
ryR
fa
a
c
e
p
o
rt
e
vve
a
a
d
e
ve
d
P
ero
dT
y
p je
ctN
..a
U
S
u
M
0
0
0
rm
p
o
7
1
7
1
.7
1
((te
e
fis
a
(M
:ooodddH
L
c
u
M
M
y
e
e
e
iaarltttsa
rre
ra
r)))y-B--O
n
e
kypR
a
s
e
T o
a
d-(TB--m
a
h)nsT
s
e
ic
k e
s
(S
u
m
1
0
4
3
9
0
8
1
6
2
9
tc
ib
h6
7
4
L a
y
r1
-)k
s
n
eS
u
b
g
r(a
C
B
R
9
3
2
5
7
1
3
0
2
7
1
d
)e0
% S
N
.4
0
16
9
8
.4
3
5
P
a
v
e
mn
tS
82
.6
N
.6
2
2 4
re
.5P
.3
n
g
th
6
9
0
3
7
R
eportD
ate:16-F
eb2017 P
age1of
Appendix C: Lab Results