We10
ard deviation for tlic of 0.35 ané 0.45 for
iid and flexible pvemens, respectively.
2.1.4 Envirdnmental Elects
‘The environment cen affect pavement performance
ia sal yoy, Tempera and mois changes
an have an eet on ty sengt, dumbiiy, and
load-arrying capacity of lhe pavement and roadbed
aterhls. Another major environmental impact is the
direct effect roadbed Swelling, pavement blowups,
frost heave, disintegration, ec, can have o@ loss of
riding quality aid setvicesbiliy. Additiona effects,
such a5 aging, drying,jand overall material deteriors-
tion due to weathering, are considered in this Guide
only in terms oftheir inherent influence gn the pave-
‘ment perfoimance prediction models.
“The actual treatment ofthe effects of seasonal tem-
perature ani moisture changes on material properties
is discussed in Sect 2.3, “Material Properties for
Structural Design” This section provides ool} the ri-
teria necessary for guantfying the pot requirements
for evaluating waded swing aad fron acave. Tf
either of thse can lead to significant loss in service-
ability or fide quality during the analysis period,
then ft (they) should be considesed in the design
analysis for all paversent structaral types, except
perhaps aggregate surfaced roads. As serviceabilty-
based models are developed for such factors 3s pave-
rent blowups, den they may be added to the design
procedure.
‘The objective ofthis step is. produce a graph of
serviceability loss versus tins spch as that illustrated
in Figure 2.2. As described in Part I, the service-
ability loss dve to environment muit be added to that
‘esting from cumulative axle louds. Figure 2.2 indi-
cates thatthe environmental loss is a result of the
summation of: losses from botti ‘swelling. jand frost
heave. The Chart may Be used to éstimate the service-
abit loss at intermediate periods, €g., at 13 years
the Joss is 0.73. Obviously, if only swelling or only
frost heave is considered, there will bé only ohe curve
‘on the graph. 'The environmental sbrviceability logs is
evaluated in detail in Appendix G, “Treatment of
Roadbed Swelling and/or Frost Heave in Design.”
j2.2, PERFORMANCE, CRITERIA
2.2.1" Serviceabitity
‘The éervitdability of a’pavement is defined as its
ability to serve-the type of traffic (automobiles and
Design of Pavement Structures
tracks) which ve the fciliy. The primary measure of
feovicesbilty ie the Present Serviceablty Inde
(PSD, which ranges from Q (impossible road) to 3%
(parte rnd). The basic design philosophy of this
Guide is the serviceability-performance concept
sbhich provides a means of designing @ poveme
bhsed on a specific total traffic voluine and 2 mini
‘mum level of serviceability desired at the end ote
performance period.
Scoston ef the Ionest allowable PSK or terminal
sericea index (p) is based on te lowes inte
that will be tolerated before rehsbiition, res
ig oemsroton bcs ee. ney a
28 or higher is suggests for desiga|of major bg
rays and’ fo highway with lesser fai vlumes
One erterin fo ideniying a rinimum level of so
feesiity my be esbished on the basis of POD
secepiance. Following are genera! guielines for mi
in eyels of p,'obtained from studies in connectibs
th ty AASHO Road Test (4):
‘Terminal Percent of People
Serviceability Level Stating Unacceptable
3.0 12
25 35
20, 85
For relatively sninor highways where economis
dictate that te inal capital outlay be kept at mii
frum, itis suggested thet this be accomplished by.
{educing the design period othe total iraffie voluat
Tather than by designing for a termine serviceabitiyg
Jews than 2.0.
Since the time at which 2 given pavement struct
reaches is terminal serviceability depends on trl
‘Yolume and the original or inital serviceability
‘some consideration must also be given to the selecti
Of pe (Ut should be recognized thatthe p, values ob
tered atthe ASHO Rosd Test were .2 for flexible
pavements and 4.5 for rigid pavements.)
‘Once pe and pare established, the following equ
tion should be applied t0 define the total change i
serviceability index:
APSI = py —
‘The equation is applicable t6 flexible, gid, and ee.
_regate-surlaced roads,en
6
= os
g Total Loss, 10.73)
: APStgwuen
ate
g
i ae
3 LT Frost Heave
oe toss,
2 APSha
3
z a
8 [4 ‘Sweting Loss.
DPSleyy
02 rt
00
° 5 noite 20
‘Timo (years)
Figure 2.2.°° A’ Coiiceptal Bxasiple of the Bavironmental Serviceabilty Loss Versus Time Graph that
may be Developed for a Specific Locationme
q22 Allowable Rutting
performance criterion for ‘ageregate!surfaced roads.
wurface pavements, no design model suitable for in-
Teporedon inf his Geide ie svble this in. I
eee
2.2.3 Aggregate Loss
‘For aggregate-surficed roads, an additions! con-
em is the aggregate loss dive w0 raffle and erosion
When aggregate lors occurs, the pavement structure
‘thinner and ‘the Joad-carrying oapicity is
duced. This reduction of the pavement structure
ckness increases the rate of surface deterioration.
7 Toren aggregate los in the procedure, itis neces-
fag exit (0) he tol eens of aggregate
will be lost during the design period, and (2) the
fainimmum thickness of aggregate that is required to
‘amaintainable working surface forthe pavement
ruc. :
‘Unfortunately, there is very litte information avail
Je today to predict the rate of apgregate loss, Below
{pan enaniple of prediction equation developed with
mited data'on fectiohs experiencing greater than
50 percent thick trafid (15, J
GL = 0.12 + 0.122307)
‘lied
GL = total aggregate loss in inches, and.
LT = number of loaded trucks in thousends
‘A second equation, which was developed from a
recent study in Brazil on typical rural sections, can be
‘employed by the user to determine the input for gravel
fos (25, 76):
Design of Pavement Stricures
oL=
(B/25.4)((004SLADT + 3380.6/R + 0.4576)
where
GL = aggregate loss, in inches, during the
period of time being considered,
B = number of bladings during the period
of time being considered,
LADT = average daily traffic in design lane
(for one-tane road use total traffic in
both directions),
R= average radius of curves, in feet, and
G absolute value of grade, in pereent.
‘Another equation, developed throbgh = British
study done in Kenya, is more applicable to areas
where there is very Bite truck activity and thus the
fey pis ose by cs. Sing i eqnton
(Gelow) is for annual gravel loss, the Stal gravel loss
{GL) would be estimated by multiplying by the nom
bef of years inthe performance period: q
AGL = (TIT? + 50)
x f(4.2 +0927 + 0.889% + 1.88V0)
where
AGL = annual aggregate loss, in inches,
T= annual waffic volume in both directions,
in thousands of vehicles,
R anual rainfall, in inches,
VC = average percentage gradient of the road,
and
F = 037 for Ineritic gravels,
= 043 for quanzitic gravels,
(008 for volcanic gravels, and
059 for coral gravels.
It should be noted that there are serious drawbacks.
with all the equations shown here; therefore, when}
‘ever possible, local information about aggregate 1oss
should be,used as input to the procedure,
2.3. MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
2.3.1 Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus
‘As discussed previously in this Part and Part I, the @
basis for materials characterization in this Guide is