Chapter 1 PHE

[Maintenance Design of Tennis Court and Mary Stuart Roads]
DEDICATION
The story of our lives; an experience of science and technology integrated in the way we breathe, the
way we communicate and in the way we survive. The findings of this research and study are dedicated
to all born in the era of technology at its climax and thus are due to experience the comfort of good
infrastructure.
[Group Project Design] i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We are indebted to the Faculty of Technology, Makerere University for integration into the curriculum
of such opportunities as this is to explore the beauty and importance of civil engineering through a field
research and design experience.
We extend our appreciation to our supervisors, Dr. Umaru Bagampadde and Eng. Dr. Albert Rugumayo
who guided us successfully through the study and without whom we would not have achieved the best
of the project.
Our thanks go out to the soil laboratory personnel, in mention, Mr. Fred Mukasa and Mr. Patrick Hamba

who in their capacity shared with us their experience and expertise in highway engineering and other
related engineering fields and for their hospitality and friendliness that made the whole experience
more interesting and fun.
And to God Almighty, for the gift of life and endless opportunities.
[Group Project Design] ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………iii
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………v
LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….vi
ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….vii
CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1 BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ............................................................................................................. 3
1.3 OBJECTIVES .............................................................................................................................. 4
1.4 SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES......................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW....................................................................................................... 5
2.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 5
2.2 DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS ............................................................................................ 6
2.2.1 STRUCTURAL DESIGN........................................................................................................ 6
2.2.2 MIX DESIGN.................................................................................................................... 13
2.3 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................... 15
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 16
3.1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 16
3.2 DATA COLLECTION ................................................................................................................. 16
3.2.1 TRAFFIC COUNTS ............................................................................................................ 16
3.2.2 ROAD MARKING ............................................................................................................. 19
3.2.3 VISUAL SURVEY .............................................................................................................. 19
3.2.4 PHOTOGRAPHY .............................................................................................................. 19
3.2.5 FIELD TESTS .................................................................................................................... 19
3.2.6 LABORATORY TESTS........................................................................................................ 22
[Group Project Design] iii
3.3 OVERLAY DESIGN ................................................................................................................... 25

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION.......................................................................... 28
4.1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 28
4.2 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS................................................................................................... 28
4.2.1 Soil Classification ............................................................................................................ 29
4.3 FIELD TEST RESULTS ............................................................................................................... 31
4.3.1 Field Density Determination ........................................................................................... 31
4.3.2 Visual Survey Results ...................................................................................................... 31
4.3.3 DCP Test Results............................................................................................................. 35
4.4 TRAFFIC COUNT RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 36
4.5 OVERLAY STRUCTURAL DESIGN .............................................................................................. 38
4.5.1 Determination of Traffic Load Class, TLC ......................................................................... 38
4.5.2 Computation of 10th Percentile of Subgrade CBR ........................................................... 39
4.5.3 Determination of the required structural number........................................................... 39
4.5.4 Overlay Design ............................................................................................................... 39
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................... 42
5.1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 42
5.2 DEDUCTIONS.......................................................................................................................... 42
5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................. 42
5.3.1 Drainage Improvement................................................................................................... 42
5.3.2 Side Walks...................................................................................................................... 43
5.3.3 Road Lighting.................................................................................................................. 43
6 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 44
APPENDICES
[Group Project Design] iv
Figure 1.1 MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA .................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2.1 Surface Coarse options a) Single Surface dressing; b) Double Surface dressing ............... 9
Figure 2.2 Monograph ........................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 2.3 Graphs of stability, bulk density and void ratio against binder content .................................. 15
Figure 3.1 Positions of traffic counters................................................................................................... 18
Figure 3.2 Chart of Overlay options ....................................................................................................... 27
Figure 4.1 Measurement of patched area .............................................................................................. 32
Figure 4.2 Measurement of potholed area............................................................................................. 32
Figure 4.3 Maintenance Design Strip Map for Tennis Court Rd – Mary Stuart Rd (1km).......................... 34
Figure 4.4 Design Overlay Options; (a) AC overlay; (b) Bituminous Mix for Base course; (c) Penetration
Macadam; (d) Granular Base course. ..................................................................................................... 41
[Group Project Design] v
Table 2.1 Classification of Sub grades ...................................................................................................... 8

Table 2.2 Nominal Values for Layer coefficients..................................................................................... 12
Table 3.1 Axle loads for the different vehicle types................................................................................ 17
Table 3.2 Equivalent Axle Load Factors .................................................................................................. 17
Table 3.3 Traffic Load Classes (TLC)........................................................................................................ 26
Table 3.4 Determination of required structural number ........................................................................ 26
Table 4.1 Laboratory Tests..................................................................................................................... 28
Table 4.2 Soil Classification.................................................................................................................... 30
Table 4.3 Field Bulk Densities ................................................................................................................ 31
Table 4.4 Results of Measured Quantities of Distressed area ................................................................. 35
Table 4.5 DCP Layer Strength Analysis Results ....................................................................................... 36
Table 4.6 Traffic Count .......................................................................................................................... 36
Table 4.7 Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs)....................................................................................... 37
Table 4.8 Average Hourly Volume.......................................................................................................... 37
Table 4.9 Calculation of Structural Number difference........................................................................... 39
[Group Project Design] vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AC ‐ Asphalt Concrete
AASHTO ‐ American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
BST ‐ Bituminous Surface Treatment
CBR ‐ California Bearing Ratio
CRB ‐ Crushed Road Base
DCP ‐ Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
DT ‐ Design Traffic
EALF ‐ Equivalency Axle Load Factor
ESAL ‐ Equivalent Standard Axle Load
LL ‐ Liquid Limit
MDD ‐ Maximum Dry Density
MOWHC ‐ Ministry Of Works Housing and Communications
MPa ‐ Mega Pascal
PI ‐ Plasticity Index
PL ‐ Plastic Limit
PM ‐ Penetration Macadam
SN ‐ Structural Number
ST ‐ Surface Treatment
TLC ‐ Traffic Load Class
TRL ‐ Transport Research Laboratory
UCS ‐ Unconfined Compressive Strength
[Group Project Design] vii
1 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
A good highway or road should ideally enable movement freight and passengers from one place to
another in the shortest possible time with minimum discomfort. Good transport therefore facilitates
infrastructural, economic and social development of a given area. The planning, design, construction,
operation and maintenance of highways depend largely on the efforts of the highway engineer, who
must transform the needs and desires of people for better transportation into reality.
Many third world countries, Uganda inclusive, have in many cases had poorly constructed and
maintained highway systems. A number of problems are attributed to this and these include poor
administration and monitoring of road works, low level of technology and abuse of traffic laws by road
users. The most prominent of the above problems is poverty hence the need for affordable yet
adequate designs to cater for the needs of road users.
Makerere University campus is located about 2km from Kampala city centre. There has been a drastic
increase in population of the campus over the past couple of years. This has caused increased traffic
loading and therefore increased strain on most of the roads on the campus. General neglect towards
maintenance has led to further deterioration of the condition, with an increase in the functional
distresses on the roads. Mary‐Stuart and Tennis court roads are located in the Western part of Makerere
University and are the roads that were chosen for this project. We decided to zero down to these two
roads because of their close proximity to the Faculty of Technology which would make field work easier.
These roads also directly affect vehicles moving to the Faculty.
Tennis court road is the main access road to a number of campus facilities namely; Complex Hall of
residence, Faculty of Psychology, School of Education, Makerere University Child learning centre and the
tennis courts while Mary‐ Stuart road is used to access Lumumba and Mary Stuart halls of residence, the
Faculty of Technology and Departments of Food science and Chemistry, St. Francis community centre
and St. Augustine student centre.
[Group Project Design] 1
Figure 1.1 below shows the general location of the roads studied on this project.
Scale 1: 4300
Key Mary Stuart Road
Tennis Court Road
Figure 1.1 MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
A number of structural and functional distresses have developed on the road pavements. This is because
the pavements can neither carry out their intended function without causing discomfort to road users
nor protect the sub grade. Performance distresses identified along different sections of the road include
potholes, corrugations, and cracking. All the above cause a number of problems for the user such as
increased fuel and oil consumption, increased travel time, increased safety hazards, increased vehicle
maintenance costs and environmental degradation from noise and exhaust.
Another problem identified on the roads is the poor road drainage system. A number of sections along
the road have blocked or broken side drains. This causes flooding on the road surface after heavy rains
which not only ruins the pavement but makes movement of pedestrians especially very difficult. A
fourth year student is currently undertaking a study on the drainage of Mary Stuart Road.
Many parts of the sidewalk are either broken in or non‐ existent, forcing pedestrians to move along the
road carriageway. This is very risky for both pedestrians and cyclists as they are vulnerable to vehicular
traffic. There is also a need to provide ramps along the sidewalk such that people in wheel chairs can
cross the road safely and with ease.
There is inadequate lighting along the road which impairs safety of road users and people living along
the road, and hence the need to provide adequate street lighting along the road.
There are no traffic signs along the road despite the vulnerability of certain sections such as the round
about near the Faculty of Chemistry and Makerere University Child learning centre at the school of
education which drivers need to be aware of. Hence a need to provide traffic signs at critical sections of
the road.
Part of Mary‐ Stuart road has been turned into a dumping site which is detrimental to aesthetic quality
of the road and the environment. Consequently, need arises for clearing the road and providing a
dumping site elsewhere for a safer and more hygienic option. There is also need to exploit the green
vegetation at some sections of the road to allow for infiltration of surface water from the road
catchment. This is a much cheaper option to setup and maintain as compared to drainage facilities. It
also facilitates green engineering which is a boost to the environment in the area.
All the above reasons necessitated a study aimed at re‐ designing the roads to avert the problems the
roads in their current state posed to road users.
1.3 OBJECTIVES
The main objective of the project was to design a five‐year maintenance programme for Tennis Court
and Mary Stuart Roads.
The specific objectives of the study were;
To establish the road condition by conducting a condition survey of the road using visual survey
and physical measurement of physical distresses
To establish structural soundness of the pavement through the DCP (Dynamic Cone Penetrometer)
test
To design a maintenance programme for both Mary‐ Stuart and Tennis Court roads
1.4 SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES

The following methods were adopted;
Review of literature on design of highways from information sources like road notes, design
manuals, the internet and other publications
Data collection in form of traffic counts, maps of the study area from Estates Department of
Makerere University and visual road surveys
Road marking and Pavement tests which included DCP and Sand Replacement tests,
Summary and analysis of data using design standards and computer analysis,
Structural Maintenance design of the road pavement and accessories necessary for improvement
to serve for a five year period.
2 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of pavement design is to limit the stresses reaching the subgrade by traffic to a safe level at
which subgrade deformation is insignificant and the pavement layers do not deteriorate to any serious
level within a specified period of time. Therefore, if a road is to be rehabilitated, improved or
constructed, the design and cost of the required works depend upon a wide range of information. This
includes the following;
Detailed condition of the pavement,
Current overall condition of the road,
Nature of the road,
Required standard of the finished road,
Cost of required activities.
This chapter contains general literature concerning pavement design. A pavement is a structure that is
made up of carefully selected and well proportioned materials and is aimed at distributing traffic load
such that the sub grade is not over stressed. There are two types of pavements namely rigid and flexible
pavements. A flexible pavement is a structure that maintains intimate contact with and distributes loads
to the sub grade and depends on aggregate interlock, particle friction, and cohesion for stability. It
normally flexes when loaded and a substantial part of the deformation is restored when the load is
removed and is normally made of three layers;
Wearing course
Base course
Sub base
2.2 DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
Design of flexible pavements entails four major steps; mix design, structural design, geometric and
drainage design. This project is however concerned with structural and mix design of pavements. A
number of methods of road design are available and these include;
AASHTO
Road Note TRL method
CBR method
Ministry of Works and Transport ( MOWT) method
However, the AASHTO method which bases on the concept of serviceability of the road pavements to be
designed is used.
2.2.1 STRUCTURAL DESIGN
The main objective is to determine for a given set of materials, the layer thicknesses required for proper
pavement performance. The principle factors/ input parameters are;
Traffic loading
Climate or environment
Material characteristics
2.2.1.1 Traffic Loading
Protection of the sub grade from the loading imposed by traffic is one of the primary functions of a
pavement structure. The designer must provide a pavement that can withstand a large number of
repeated applications of variable‐ magnitude loadings. The magnitude of axle and wheel loads is a
loading factor required in pavement design. Traffic is considered in terms of axles. Some of the common
types include single axles, tandem axles and tridem axles. It is however convenient to handle all traffic in
terms of the legal standard axle load ( an 18,000 pound single axle load with dual tyres) to which all the
other axle types are converted using an equivalence factor.
The Equivalence Axle Load Factor (EALF) is defined as the damage per pass of a given axle load to a
pavement divided by the damage per pass of the standard axle to the same pavement.
EALF = Nfs / Nfi
If all the axes are summed up after converting them to the standard axle, the sum gives the total
number of equivalent single axle loads (ESAL). The tire pressure and contact area are other important
loading factors. When the tire is in contact with a pavement surface, it exhibits a contact area known as
the imprint area. The imprint is assumed to be circular with a radius, a.
Imprint area; A = πa 2
Load = area x pressure; P = A x p
P = πa 2 p
a = (P/ pπ) 1/2
For proper tyre inflation, the pressure between the road and the tyre surface should be equal to the
pressure of the tyre.
2.2.1.2 Climate or Environment
This affects the behaviour and performance of the various materials in the pavement and sub grade.
Probably the two climatic factors of major influence are temperature and moisture. The magnitude of
temperature and its fluctuations affects the properties of certain materials e.g. asphaltic concrete looses
stability at high temperatures and becomes very hard and stiff at low temperatures.
Subgrade soils and other paving materials weaken appreciably when saturated, and certain clayey soils
exhibit substantial moisture – induced volume change hence moisture must be taken into account.
Climate does not only affect the choice of materials but the drainage as well. Climate in the tropics
covers a wide variety of ranges comprising of;
Afro – alpine climate,
Equatorial climate,
Wet tropical climate,
Semi arid climate,
Arid climate and
Very arid climate.
2.2.1.3 Material Characteristics
Various standard test methods are used to determine material properties but generally the following
are required.
a) Sub grades – CBR, modulus of sub grade reaction and resilient modulus

b) Sub base – CBR, resilient modulus
c) Base course – CBR, resilient modulus and unconfined compressive stress
d) Wearing course – resilient modulus and stability
SUBGRADES
These are normally classified depending on their load supporting capacity under the least favourable
density and moisture conditions to which they are subjected during the design period. Load supporting
capacity is determined based on CBR. Normally it is required that sub grades don’t go below 8%.
Table 2.1 shown below is referenced from Highway Engineering by Huang and it shows the different
subgrade classes and their ranges of soaked CBR.
Table 2.1 Classification of Sub grades
Sub grade class Range of soaked CBR
S0 < 2
S1 2 – 7
S2 6 – 14
S3 12 – 20
S4 18 – 30
S5 > 30
SUB BASE
It is required that if natural gravels are used, the CBR should be at least 30%. In addition, the following
points should be noted;
The maximum plasticity index (PI) depends on the climate and sub grade. PIs up to 25% may be
tolerated in dry areas where the annual rainfall is less than 500mm. on the contrary; PIs should not
exceed 15% in wet areas under permeable bases because of the risk of migration of plastic fines in
to other layers.
The gravel materials should be carefully selected so as to avoid unsuitable minerals e.g. mica,
dolomites, etc.
Natural gravels, sands or clays which don’t meet strength requirements may be improved by using
either cement or lime.
BASE
If natural/ crushed gravel is used then these conditions will apply;
If the wearing course is thin (< 500mm of asphalt concrete), then the 4‐ day soaked CBR should
exceed 80% at 90% MDD.
Under thick surfacing, lower CBR requirements may be considered.
If graded/ crushed gravel is used, then the dense graded mix should be obtained with a CBR close to
100%.
Cement treated gravels can mobilise a UCS after 7 days of curing of between (2 – 3.5 ) MPa.
WEARING COURSE
Surfacing can be done using either surface or asphalt dressings. Surface dressing may be single (12mm
thick) or double (19+12 mm thick). These are illustrated in Figure 2.1 below
Stone chippings
Bitumen
Option a
Stone chippings
Bitumen
Stone chippings
Bitumen
Option b
Figure 2.1 Surface Coarse options a) Single Surface dressing; b) Double Surface dressing
Asphalt concrete consists of a well graded mixture of coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and filler bound
together using straight run bitumen of preferably 80/ 100 penetration grade. For a high traffic and
temperature, a fairly stiff mix should be used while more flexible mixtures can be tolerated for medium
and low traffic. In the AASHTO design method, the concept of structural number is employed. Structural
number (SN) is a measure of the strength of a set of road layers.
Determination of Structural Number
Structural Numbers can be calculated using a monograph such as that shown in figure 2.2 below which
is referenced from Highway Engineering by Huang.
Resilient Structural Modified Structural

Traffic Regional Factor (R)
Modulus (E) Number (SN) Number (SN)
Figure 2.2 Monograph
Parameters of the Monograph
(i) Traffic
The total design traffic usually takes into account these factors;
Directional speed of traffic
Average daily ESAL (Tb)
Average annual traffic, T0 = 365*Tb
Lane split
Annual rate of traffic growth (r)
Design life of pavement (n)
The design traffic is calculated as;
(1 + ) − 1
= ×
(ii) Resilient Modulus (E)
This is the dynamic equivalent of elastic modulus of materials in the pavement structure. In reality, most

materials that comprise flexible pavements are not elastic and exhibit inelastic behaviour such as
permanent deformation and time dependency (Viscoelastic behaviour). If the stress exerted on a
material is small compared to its strength and the exertion is repeated many times, the strain under
each load application is nearly the same and is proportional to the stress hence it can be considered
elastic.
Resilient Modulus of Sub grade soils is determined using the Tri axial test. However, this is quite time
consuming, therefore, other empirical correlations between resilient modulus and other soil properties
are available and can be used as a guide to estimate the resilient modulus of a sub grade soil. One
relationship involves the use of CBR values of the sub grade soil.
E (psi) = 1500 CBR
E (MPa) = 10.3 CBR
(iii) Regional Factor
This is dependent on the environmental climate of a particular area and can be referenced from a road
design manual table.
Calculation
Wearing course structural number SN1 = a1h1

Base and Wearing coarse structural number SN2 = a1h1 + a2h2
Sub base, base and Wearing coarse structural number SN3 = a1h1 + a2h2 + a3h3

Layer coefficients can be determined depending on the materials used for each layer and the CBR or
UCS values as shown in table 2.2 below.
Table 2.2 Nominal Values for Layer coefficients
Layer / material Layer coefficient ( at 25°C)
A) surfacing
a) surface dressing a1 = 0.20
b) asphalt concrete a1 = 0.35
B) Base
a) bitumen macadam a2 = 0.20
b) natural/ crushed gravel a2 = 0.12
c) crushed stone
i) on natural gravel sub base a2 = 0.14
ii) on stabilised sub base a2 = 0.18
d) cement/ lime treated gravel
i) 3.5 – 5.0 (UCS) a2 = 0.18
ii) 2.0 – 3.5 (UCS) a2 = 0.14
C) sub base
a) natural gravel (CBR > 30) a3 = 0.11
b) cement/ lime treated gravel
i) UCS > 2 a3 = 0.16
ii) UCS 0.7 ‐ 2 a3 = 0.12
2.2.2 MIX DESIGN

This involves determination of relative proportions of materials in a mixture. The basic principles
behind mix design include;
Provision of a suitable air voids content
Provide adequate stability against deformation
Account for aggregate absorption
MIX DESIGN OF PREMIX MATERIALS
Mix design of pre‐ mix materials has the following purposes;
Preliminary study of materials
Determination of a job mix formula
Quality control in placement of large quantities of mixtures
Preliminary evaluation of the placed mixture
The commonly used methods include;
Marshall method
Hveem method
Super pave method
Marshall Method
It involves the following procedure;
a) Choose a suitable bitumen and a well graded aggregate
b) Prepare specimen (in triplicate) for seven different bitumen contents. Most aggregates call for about
1200 gms to be mixed with bitumen.
c) The binder and aggregates are heated to above mixing temperature and mixed when hot for about 2
minutes
d) The mixture is poured into a hot mould and compacted with 75 blows using a Marshall hammer,
both on top and the bottom of the specimen.
e) Keep the specimen in the mould for 24 hours, extrude the specimen from the mould and determine
the bulk density
f) Determine the Maximum Specific Gravity by crushing the specimen and using Archimedes principle.
g) Determine the percentage of air voids using the formula:
% age Air Voids =
Where Gmm = Maximum Specific Gravity
Gmb = Bulk Specific Gravity
Determine Marshal Stability (kN) and Marshall flow (vertical displacement in 0.01 inch) using the
Marshall testing machine. Testing is done at 60°C at loading rate of 50 mm/min.
The plots in figure 2.3 below are made to enable calculation of the design structural number by
determining three different binder content values based on the relationship between stability, bulk
density and void air ratio.
The design binder content is finally calculated using the following formula;
+ +
=
3
Stability
Binder Content
BC1
gb
Binder Content
BC2
V air
4 %
Binder Content
BC3
Figure 2.3 Graphs of stability, bulk density and void ratio against binder content
2.3 CONCLUSION
The literature gathered above was found to be sufficient for the design procedure used. It covered the
entire pavement design. Not only was it comprehensive, it also gave more insight into the methods that
were used in the final stages of analysis. However, the major gap observed in the current knowledge
that was assumed important was the absence of data on methods of maintenance design for pavement
structures.
3 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This study methodology includes a review of the details involved in data collection and analysis, making
conclusions and recommendations based on study findings.
3.2 DATA COLLECTION
This included the different forms employed both in the field and laboratory to collect information that
could be analysed and used to determine the current condition of the road.
3.2.1 TRAFFIC COUNTS
Traffic counts were conducted for two way traffic at different junctions within 2 hour intervals. These
were conducted from 7‐9 am, 1‐3pm and 5‐7pm. The number of vehicles passing every station at
different junctions were counted and recorded and the maximum traffic count of each vehicle type in
either direction was considered. The analysis of the traffic counts are shown in Appendix D.
The motor traffic was classified depending on the different sizes as shown below;
Cars and four‐ wheel drives: this category included most passenger cars which approximated to
1.5 tones in laden weight.
Coasters: this included passenger cars with more than 4 tires and carriage capacity of about 28
passengers.
Motor cycles: (boda‐ bodas, two wheel carriage)
Pick ups
Mini buses (matatus): these included taxis and other passenger vans
Buses
Trucks: these were mostly being used to transport construction material to various construction
sites
The axle loads of the different vehicle types were read off the log books of each vehicle type and are
summarised in Table 3.1 below.
Table 3.1 Axle loads for the different vehicle types
Axle loads
Front Rear Front Rear
Vehicle type kg kg lb lb
Saloon Car & 4WD 1,000 (s) 1,750 (s) 1,000 (s) 2,000 (s)
Pick Ups 1,750 (s) 2,250 (s) 2,000 (s) 4,000 (s)
Mini buses 2,000 (s) 3,000 (s) 4,000 (s) 6,000 (s)
Coasters 3,000 (s) 5,000 (T) 6,000 (s) 12,000 (T)
Buses 3,000 (s) 5,500 (T) 6,000 (s) 12,000 (T)
Trucks 4,000 (s) 8,250 (T) 8,000 (s) 24,000 (T)
The equivalent axle load factors provided in table 3.2 were designed to include the motorcycle and
pedestrian traffic. The factors were interpolated from the standards provided in Highway Engineering,
7 th edition (Paul H. Wright and Karen Dickson).
Table 3.2 Equivalent Axle Load Factors
Axle Load (kg) E A L F
1,000 (s) 0.00002
2,000 (s) 0.00018
4,000 (s) 0.00209
6,000 (s) 0.01043
8,000 (s) 0.03430
12,000 (T) 0.01440
24,000 (T) 0.26000
A drawing showing the positions of traffic counters at the different junctions is shown in figure
3.1 below.
Lumumba hall
Mary Stuart Hall St. Francis
Faculty of
community centre
Agriculture &
Forestry
N
Dept.
psychology
Tennis courts
Complex
Hall
Figure 3.1 Positions of traffic counters
KEY: Station 1 Station 5

Station 2 Station 6
Station 3 Station 7
Station 4
Stations were positioned immediately after each junction on the road to account for traffic that did not
proceed to successive stations. Traffic was numerated in both the Northbound and Southbound
directions at each station.
3.2.2 ROAD MARKING
This involved demarcating the road into 100m sections using a pedometer to measure the chainages
and a paint brush and road marking paint to mark the chainage along the curb. The first chainage (0+00)
was marked at the Complex hall round about along Tennis Court road and the last chainage (1+00) was
marked at the round about next to the Faculty of Chemistry along Mary‐ Stuart road.
3.2.3 VISUAL SURVEY
This was carried out to determine the current state of both Tennis court and Mary‐ Stuart roads. The
surface condition of the road was assessed based on the potholes, cracks and patched area at different
chainages. A measuring tape was used to obtain the dimensions of the above distresses which were
then summed up for the critical road sections. The condition of the right and left road shoulders was
also assessed depending on how much of it had been eroded over time. The side drains were also
surveyed, their depths along different sections measured and the presence of silt and other material
causing blockage noted. The above findings were recorded in Appendix C.
3.2.4 PHOTOGRAPHY
Photographs were taken at the different test sites to clearly show the current condition of the road,
some of which have been included in Appendix A.
3.2.5 FIELD TESTS
Two major field tests were carried out namely;
DCP ( Dynamic Cone Penetration) test
Sand replacement method for determination of field density
3.2.5.1 DCP test
The DCP is used to generate data which can be analysed to produce accurate information on in situ
pavement layer thicknesses and strengths. The DCP apparatus consists of a cone fixed to the bottom of
a vertical rod. A hammer is attached to the apparatus and a vertical scale alongside the road is used to
read off measurements.
Procedure
a) The apparatus was set up on the road pavement at the first point at chainage 0+05 and the
hammer repeatedly lifted and dropped onto a coupling at the mid‐height of the rod to deliver a
standard impact, or ‘blow’, to the cone and drive it into the pavement.
b) A vertical 1 metre scale alongside the rod was used to measure the depth of penetration of the
cone.
c) The penetration and the number of blows were recorded on a Test Data Form, shown in Appendix
C.
d) The above procedure was repeated for 11 other points at different road sections. More than one
DCP test was carried out on sections which had very weak surface layers.
Theory
The DCP instrument with an extension rod of 400 mm can be used to a depth of 1200 mm. Although
the instrument can be extended beyond this depth, with additional extension rods or an extension road
longer than 400 mm, it is not recommended that this is done as friction between the rod and the soil
can give unreliable data. Indeed, if the rod cannot be rotated by hand during a penetration test, it is
probable that friction is too high, in which case the test should be repeated.
The penetration per blow, the ‘penetration rate’, as the cone is driven into the pavement is used to
calculate the strength of the material through which the cone is passing. A change in penetration rate
indicates a change in strength between materials, thus allowing layers to be identified and the
thickness and strength of each to be determined. These layers are then grouped together into the
pavement layers of base, sub‐base and subgrade, guided by test pit or as‐built records if available.
3.2.5.2 Sand Replacement Test
The two most important methods of measuring the density of a soil in situ are the ‘sand replacement
method’ and the ‘core cutter method’ which is suitable for cohesive and non stony soils only. The sand
replacement method is used for non‐ cohesive fine soils and is described below, with details of the
results in Appendix B1. The method is applicable to material at the test location containing up to 40% by
mass of particles larger than 37.5 mm size. The Sand Replacement method provides a practical
technique of determining the in‐place density of soil and related materials in base courses, roadways,

dams, embankments, levees and similar construction.
Procedure
Calibration of sand;
a) Dry sand was sieved through No. 20 sieve and was set aside for the test.

b) The sand was then poured to the brim of a 1litre capacity cylinder which was placed over a
calibrating can of 100mm diameter and 150mm depth. The volume of the sand was representative
of the hole to be dug in the field.
c) An outlet in the cylinder was opened and the sand allowed to dispense into the calibrating can.
d) The amount of sand collected in the calibrating can was determined by finding the difference in
mass between the sand in the cylinder before and after placing it in the can.
e) The above procedure was repeated for two other sand samples and the average value computed.
f) The amount of sand in cone was determined by placing a cylinder full of sand on a piece of paper
and opening the outlet thus allowing the sand to flow onto the paper. The mass of sand collected
on the paper was then determined.
g) The calibrating can was then filled to the brim with water and the density of the can determined
by dividing the mass of water in the can by volume of the can.
Field test
a) The wearing course layer was removed from an area large enough to place the field density
plate/tray until the base layer was exposed.
b) The plate had a 100mm diameter hole at its centre, and two small holes at its diagonal ends
through which nails were passed to anchor the plate to the ground.
c) A 150mm deep hole was cut out of the layer using a hammer and chisel, through the hole in the
plate. In preparing the density hole, the center opening of the plate was used as a template to
control the diameter of the hole. The plate itself was used as a shelf to prevent the loss of soil.
d) The plate facilitated the removal of soil from the density hole. During the removal operation, all the
extracted soil was placed in a polythene bag together with any that fell on the field density plate /
tray such that none of it was lost. The soil extracted from the hole was weighed and the weight
recorded.
e) The cylinder was placed over the hole, on the tray and the hole filled with sand. The amount of
sand retained in the cylinder after filling the hole was bagged and weighed.
f) The above procedure was repeated at three other points
g) The thickness of the wearing course at each point was measured using a ruler
h) The results of the sand replacement test are recorded in Appendix B1
3.2.6 LABORATORY TESTS
The following tests were carried out on samples obtained from different test pits at different chainages
along the road.
3.2.6.1 Plasticity test
3.2.6.1.1 Liquid limit test (Cassagrande’s apparatus)
Liquid Limit (LL or wL) is the water content, in percent, of a soil at the arbitrarily defined boundary
between the semi liquid and plastic states. The Liquid Limit Device is a mechanical device consisting of a
brass cup suspended from a carriage designed to control its drop onto a hard rubber base. The device
may be operated by either a hand crank or electric motor. A device called a cam is designed to raise the
cup smoothly and continuously to its maximum height, over a distance of at least 180 o of cam rotation,
without developing an upward or downward velocity of the cup when the cam follower leaves the cam.
A Flat Grooving Tool is a tool made of plastic or non‐corroding metal having specified dimensions used
to split the soil sample in the brass cup. The results for this test are detailed in Appendix B2.
Procedure for Liquid Limit
a) The liquid limit device was cleaned and the height of drop of the cup adjusted so that the point of
the cup in contact with the base rose to a height of about 10 mm.
b) A sample of the specimen was placed on a glass plate and the water content of the specimen
increased by adding distilled water and mixing on a glass plate with a spatula.
c) A portion of the prepared sample was placed in the cup of the liquid limit device at the point where
the cup rested on the base and spread so that it was 10mm deep at its deepest point. A horizontal
surface was formed over the soil and care taken to remove bubbles from the soil specimen. The
unused portion of the specimen was kept in a storage container.
d) A groove was made in the soil by drawing the grooving tool, beveled edge forward, through the soil
from the top of the cup to the bottom of the cup. When forming the groove, the tip of the grooving
tool was held against the surface of the cup and the tool kept perpendicular to the surface of the
cup.
e) The cup was lifted and dropped at a rate of 2 drops per second until the two halves of the soil
specimen met each other at the bottom of the groove.
f) The number of drops required to close the groove was recorded and a slice of soil was removed
and its water content, w, determined.
g) Repeat steps 1 through 5 with a sample of soil at a slightly higher or lower water content. Whether
water should be added or removed depends on the number of blows required to close the grove in
the previous sample.
h) NB: The liquid limit is the water content at which it will take 25 blows to close the groove over a
distance of 13 mm. Three tests were run, increasing the water content each time. As the water
content increased, it took fewer blows to close the groove.
i) The relationship between the water content, w, and the corresponding number of drops, N, of the
cup was plotted on a semi logarithmic graph with water content as the ordinates and arithmetical
scale, and the number of drops on the abscissas on a logarithmic scale. The best fit straight line
through the five or more plotted points was drawn.
j) The water content corresponding to the intersection of the line with the 25 drop abscissa was
taken as the liquid limit, LL, of the soil.
3.2.6.1.2 Plastic limit test
Plastic Limit (PL or wP) is the water content, in percent, of a soil at the boundary between the plastic and
semi‐solid states.
Procedure for Determination of the Plastic Limit
About 2g of the same sample used for the preparation for the liquid limit test was selected.
The test specimen was rolled between the palm and fingers on a ground glass plate to form a
thread of uniform diameter.
The rolling was continued until the threads reached a 3mm diameter
The sample was then rolled into a ball and the procedure repeated until the soil reached a point
where it crumbled and cracked at that diameter.
The moisture content of the soil at this point was determined as shown below. The procedure
was repeated twice such that an average plastic limit for the sample was computed.
The average of the water contents obtained from the three plastic limit tests was computed.
The plastic limit, PL, was the average of the three water contents.
3.2.6.1.3 Plasticity Index
The plasticity index was calculated as follows:
PI = LL ‐ PL
Where:
LL = liquid limit, and PL = plastic limit.
3.2.6.2 Sieve Analysis
Separation of the soil into its fractions may be done by a sieve analysis performed directly on soils that
contain little or no fines. There are two types of sieve analysis namely a wet sieve and dry sieve analysis.
If the character of the fines is such that the fine material adheres to the coarser particles and cannot be
removed by dry sieving action, the sample is washed to remove the fine material.
Procedure
a) The sample was pre washed so as to remove fine material and that retained on No. 200 sieve
during the washing process was then dried in an oven for 24 hours.
b) A stack of sieves was arranged in descending order of size from 20mm aperture to 0.75µm.
c) The dried soil sample was weighed and allowed to pass freely through the sieves which were then
manually shaken such that the sample was separated on basis of size.
d) The mass of material retained on each sieve was the weighed and recorded in a table.
e) The analysis of this is shown in Appendix B5 and the soil characterised accordingly.
3.2.6.3 Moisture Content test
The moisture content of the soil was also determined by placing a wet sample of known mass into a
moisture content tin, which was placed in an oven. The weight of the tin and dry soil was determined
after leaving the sample in the oven for 24 hours, and finally determining the moisture content of the
test soil. The moisture content is determined as the percentage of the ratio of the mass of water in the
soil sample to the dry mass of the soil sample.
3.3 OVERLAY DESIGN
The overlay design basically entailed the following steps:
a) Determination of the design traffic required for the road currently in terms of millions of
Equivalent Single Axle loads (ESAL). Using Table 3.1 below, the Traffic Load Class (TLC) was
obtained.
b) Knowing the TLC and the 10 th percentile of the subgrade CBR, Table 3.2 was used to determine
the required structural number (SNreq) for the pavement to sustain the future traffic over the
design life in years. The design life was chosen as 5 years.
c) The difference between the required structural number and the existing structural number gave
the difference (SNdiff) that accounted for requirement of an overlay or some treatment to improve
the strength.
d) SNdiff was then used in the chart shown in figure 3.2 below to determine an appropriate option for
strengthening the existing pavement.
Tables 3.3 and 3.4 and figure 3.2 below were obtained from Over seas Road notes (ORN 18).
Table 3.3 Traffic Load Classes (TLC)
Design Traffic Loading Traffic Load Classes
(ESAL x 10 6 ) (TLC)
< 0.2 TLC 02
0.2 – 0.5 TLC 05
0.5 – 1 TLC 1
1 – 3 TLC 3
3 – 10 TLC 10
10 – 20 TLC 20
20 – 50 TLC 50
Table 3.4 Determination of required structural number
Required Structural Number, SNreq
Subgrade Traffic Load Classes
CBR TLC 02 TLC 05 TLC 1 TLC 3 TLC 10 TLC 20 TLC 50
> 30 1.10 1.25 1.60 1.90 2.35 3.00 3.50
15 – 29 1.35 1.50 1.80 2.20 2.75 3.80 4.20
10 – 14 1.60 1.80 2.10 2.50 3.00 4.10 4.50
7 – 9 1.90 2.00 2.30 2.75 3.30 4.30 4.70
5 – 6 2.10 2.20 2.50 2.90 3.50 4.50 5.00
3 – 4 2.40 2.80 3.10 3.40 4.00 5.00 5.50
Figure 3.2 Chart of Overlay options
4 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter contains data obtained from visual surveys and the results of the tests that were carried
out both in the field and in the laboratory, which were carried out to identify and classify the materials
of the pavement layers, and to establish the distresses on the road. It also contains the analysis of the
said results and their discussion. The result of the analysis and discussion is the design of a maintenance
programme for both Tennis Court and Mary Stuart Roads.
4.2 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
The main purpose of the tests was to classify the soils that comprised the different pavement layers. The
laboratory tests carried out are summarized in Table 4.1 below which shows the different tests, their
purpose and specific referencing in Appendix B.
Table 4.1 Laboratory Tests
Test No. Test Purpose Reference
1 Sand Replacement To determine the in‐situ bulk density of the Appendix B1

pavement to a depth of 150mm
2 Cassagrande To determine the Liquid Limit of the soil Appendix B2

samples taken from the pavement layers in
the field.
3 Rolling Test To determine the Plastic Limit of the soil Appendix B3

samples taken from the field.
4 Moisture Content To determine the moisture content of the
soil samples taken from the pavement layers
in the field Appendix B4
5 Sieve Analysis To determine the particle grading according Appendix B5

to size.
4.2.1 Soil Classification
The AASHTO method of Soil Classification was used to group the soil into standardised soil classes. This
was done using the particle size grading (Sieve Analysis) and the Atterberg limits. Table 4.2 below shows
the AASHTO classification based specifically on the liquid limit, plasticity index, moisture content and the
percentage of fines passing the N0. 200 sieve during sieve analysis.
Table 4.2 Soil Classification
Sample Chainage Bulk density Liquid Limit Plasticity Moisture %age AASHTO General Remarks

No. Index Content passing
(g/cm 3 ) (%) No.200 classification
(%) (%) sieve
1 0 + 310 2.55 30.82 16.18 12.2 33.7 A‐2‐6 Generally good soil
Silty or clayey gravel and
sand
Large amount of fines in
the soil
2 0 + 520 2.35 30.82 21.16 13.5 ‐ ‐ Soil is plastic since the PI

is greater than 18
3 0 + 924 2.85 24.54 17.50 10.3 37.7 A‐6 Poor clayey plastic soil
Large amount of fines in
the soil
4 0 + 953 2.21 29.85 22.38 10.1 44.0 A‐6 Poor clayey plastic soil
4.3 FIELD TEST RESULTS

The field tests included determination of field density using the Sand Replacement method and the
establishment of the soundness of the subgrade using the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) test, the
results of which test have been included in Appendix C1.
4.3.1 Field Density Determination
Field density was determined by the Sand Replacement test. A summary of the test results is shown in
Table 4.3 below.
Table 4.3 Field Bulk Densities
Sample ID Chainage Bulk density, ρb = Mb/Vb
g/cm 3 or Mg/m 3
Sample 1 Vb1 0 + 310 2.55
Sample 2 Vb2 0 + 520 2.35
Sample 3 Vb3 0 + 924 2.85
Sample 4 Vb4 0 + 953 2.21
4.3.2 Visual Survey Results
The visual survey conducted aided the identification of present road distresses. The major distresses
noted were:
a) Potholes
b) Patching
c) Cracking
d) Edge failure
e) Side drain condition
Patches
The lengths (L1 & L2) were measured as shown in Figure 4.1 below using a measuring tape.
L2
L1
Figure 4.1 Measurement of patched area
The total patched area of each section was calculated as Σ (L1 x L2)
The patched area of each section was then expressed as a percentage of the total area of the section.
The average width of the entire road measured along different sections was 6.8 metres as shown in
Appendix C2.
Potholes
The average diameter of each pothole was calculated as (ф1 + ф2)/ 2, and the total potholed area of each

section was calculated as ∑ (πф 2 / 4) as shown in Appendix C2. The lengths (ф1, ф2) were measured as
shown in Figure 4.2 below
Φ2
Φ1
Figure 4.2Measurement of potholed area
A survey form – strip map – was prepared for use during maintenance programmes for the roads. The
map is illustrated below in figure 4.3.
Figure 4.3 Maintenance Design Strip Map for Tennis Court Rd – Mary Stuart Rd (1km)
A summary of the analysis of the above distresses was recorded in Table 4.4 below indicative of the
percentage area of each section of the road that was distressed by patching, potholes and cracking.
Table 4.4 Results of Measured Quantities of Distressed area
Distress: Patching Potholes Cracking

Total Total
Start End % area Total % area % area
patched Distress
Chainage Chainage distressed Distress (m 2 ) distressed distressed
area (m 2 ) (m 2 )
0 + 000 0 + 100 135.42 20 3.92 1 2.40 0.35
0 + 100 0 + 200 298.22 44 98.08 14 0.84 0.12
0 + 200 0 + 300 222.78 33 9.52 1 1.73 0.25
0 + 300 0 + 400 148.91 22 13.86 2 6.97 1.03
0 + 400 0 + 500 28.14 4 7.92 1 0.00 0.00
0 + 500 0 + 600 23.69 3 20.49 3 0.00 0.00
0 + 600 0 + 700 64.01 9 4.03 1 0.00 0.00
0 + 700 0 + 800 11.92 2 6.40 1 0.00 0.00
0 + 800 0 + 900 117.72 17 16.26 2 0.00 0.00
0 + 900 1 + 000 24.14 4 18.56 3 0.00 0.00
Average area for a section = 680 m 2
4.3.3 DCP Test Results
The DCP test results were analysed using UK DCP 3.1 software. A summary of the penetration data and
DCP test results has been appended (see Appendix C). The strength analysis of each layer per chainage
tested was obtained and summarised in table 4.5 below with the inclusion of CBR and computed
Structural Number (SN) values.
Table 4.5 DCP Layer Strength Analysis Results
Base Sub‐base Subgrade

Existing
Test # Chainage CBR CBR
Thickness Thickness CBR % SN
% %
1 0 + 005 249 149 0 0 61 1.52
2 0 + 310 163 68 207 38 24 1.81
3 0 + 520 187 47 116 98 168 1.39
4 0 + 521 239 105 187 75 235 2.29
5 0 + 522 161 74 229 71 42 1.98
6 0 + 730 222 60 58 47 91 1.47
7 0 + 731 209 119 149 87 54 1.99
8 0 + 732 164 108 212 102 53 2.01
9 0 + 924 298 40 47 28 62 1.32
10 0 + 950 168 59 146 37 49 1.48
11 0 + 951 178 65 232 29 43 1.85
12 0 + 953 180 51 204 53 62 1.57
4.4 TRAFFIC COUNT RESULTS
The number of axles summarised in table 4.6 below were mirrored as the vehicle traffic on the road. The
maximum number of vehicles per hour was obtained by comparison of the traffic counts at the different
junctions to design for the worst case.
Table 4.6 Traffic Count
Number of Axles
North bound South bound
Vehicle type 7am‐9am 1pm‐3pm 5pm‐7pm 7am‐9am 1pm‐3pm 5pm‐7pm
Saloon Car &
4WD 65 122 145 69 175 238
Pick Ups 8 17 7 9 18 19
Mini buses 1 2 7 6 3 8
Coasters 0 0 0 2 1 1
Buses 0 0 1 1 1 0
Trucks 0 4 1 2 6 3
The axles were then converted into equivalent axle loads using the information in table 3.2 above. The
computation of the number of repetitions to give the traffic volume is shown in tables 4.7 and 4.8
below.
Table 4.7 Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs)
Number of Axles Repetitions
North bound South bound North bound South bound
7am‐ 1pm‐ 5pm‐ 7am‐ 1pm‐ 5pm‐ 7am‐ 1pm‐ 5pm‐ 7am‐ 1pm‐ 5pm‐
Axle Load (lb) E A L F
9am 3pm 7pm 9am 3pm 7pm 9am 3pm 7pm 9am 3pm 7pm
1,000 (s) 0.00002 65 122 145 69 175 238 0.0013 0.0024 0.0029 0.0014 0.0035 0.0048
2,000 (s) 0.00018 73 139 152 78 193 257 0.0131 0.0250 0.0274 0.0140 0.0347 0.0463
4,000 (s) 0.00209 9 19 14 15 21 27 0.0188 0.0397 0.0293 0.0314 0.0439 0.0564
6,000 (s) 0.01043 1 2 8 9 5 9 0.0104 0.0209 0.0834 0.0939 0.0522 0.0939
8,000 (s) 0.03430 0 4 1 2 6 3 0.0000 0.1372 0.0343 0.0686 0.2058 0.1029
12,000 (T) 0.01440 0 0 1 3 2 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0144 0.0432 0.0288 0.0144
24,000 (T) 0.26000 0 4 1 2 6 3 0.0000 1.0400 0.2600 0.5200 1.5600 0.7800
Total ESALs (repetitions) 0.0437 1.2652 0.4517 0.7724 1.9289 1.0986
Table 4.8 Average Hourly Volume
Average Traffic Volume
2‐hourly Hourly
7:00 ‐ 9:00 Lane 1max 0.0437 0.02184
0.2040
Lane 2max 0.7724 0.38622
1:00 ‐ 3:00 Lane 1max 1.2652 0.632615
0.798528 0.4634
Lane 2max 1.9289 0.96444
5:00 ‐ 7:00 Lane 1max 0.4517 0.22583
0.38757
Lane 2max 1.0986 0.54931
Computation of Daily Average Traffic volume
Assuming a typical working day with 18 driving hours;
Daily average traffic volume , Tb = Average hourly traffic x 18
= 0.4634 ESALs per hour x 18 hours
= 8.3412 ESALs.
Annual ESALs for the year 2007, To,
T0 = 8.3412 ESALs per day x 365 days per year
= 3044.538 ESALs.
Computation of Cumulative Traffic, DT, over a 5‐yr design period
Assumptions:
a) Design period, n = 5 years
b) Traffic growth rate, r = 6%
c) Traffic growth rate is constant.
Design traffic, DT =
( )
= × ESALs
( )
= 3044.538 × ESALs
DT = 8.528 x 10 6 ESALs
Thus, the design traffic loading is 8.528 x 10 6 ESALs (repetitions).
4.5 OVERLAY STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Reference is made to Table 3.1 in the methodology to obtain the traffic loading class for the road(s).
4.5.1 Determination of Traffic Load Class, TLC

The design traffic loading obtained falls in the range (3‐10) x 10 6 ESALs, hence corresponds to the traffic
load class, TLC 10
4.5.2 Computation of 10th Percentile of Subgrade CBR
The 10 th percentile of the subgrade CBR was determined using the excel percentile macro. It was
obtained as 42.1%.
4.5.3 Determination of the required structural number
From Table 3.4, the structural number required that corresponds to a TLC of 10 and a CBR value in the
range >30% is 2.35
4.5.4 Overlay Design
The difference between the required structural number and existing structural number is calculated as
shown in table 4.9 below.
Table 4.9 Calculation of Structural Number difference
Existing Required SN

Test # Chainage
SN SN Difference
1 0 + 005 1.52 2.35 0.83
2 0 + 310 1.81 2.35 0.54
3 0 + 520 1.39 2.35 0.96
4 0 + 521 2.29 2.35 0.06
5 0 + 522 1.98 2.35 0.37
6 0 + 730 1.47 2.35 0.88
7 0 + 731 1.99 2.35 0.36
8 0 + 732 2.01 2.35 0.34
9 0 + 924 1.32 2.35 1.03
10 0 + 950 1.48 2.35 0.87
11 0 + 951 1.85 2.35 0.5
12 0 + 953 1.57 2.35 0.78
The largest SN difference is 1.03. This value is then compared with overlay options under a bituminous
mix for base given in figure 3.2 above, to determine an appropriate option for strengthening the existing
pavement.
The greatest SN difference obtained above represents the most critical section of the existing road
pavement and hence is the worst case scenario. The closest structural number difference in the chart to
that calculated is 1.00. The overlay alternatives corresponding to the above difference are indicative of
the maintenance requirement of the road pavement. Four alternatives are available. These are
illustrated in Figure 4.4 below.
ST
60 mm 80 mm
AC
(a) (b)
60mm thick asphalt concrete layer placed on the base to sustain it Surface Treatment overlaying an 80mm thick bituminous dressing
for the next 5 years at the predicted loading conditions. over the base course.
ST ST
100 mm 150mm
PM 60 CRB
(c) (d)
Surface Treatment overlaying a 100mm thick macadam (PM 60) Surface Treatment overlaying a 200mm thick CRR layer over the base

dressing over the base course. course
Figure 4.4 Design Overlay Options; (a) AC overlay; (b) Bituminous Mix for Base course; (c) Penetration Macadam; (d) Granular Base course.
5 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter contains the interpretation of the analysis presented in Chapter Four in view of the
attainment of the set objectives of the project. Wherein the said objectives were not achieved,
recommendations have been made in the following paragraphs to welcome future researchers and
designers to collaborate on the project.
5.2 DEDUCTIONS
Generally, the road condition as evidenced from the condition survey conducted was poor,
characterised by a number of physical pavement distresses. The dominant distresses were potholes and
patches. A few cracks were observed but only one section was severely cracked as indicated on the Strip
Map in Chapter Four. The map was developed for use in forthcoming maintenance programmes for the
two roads – Tennis Court Road and Mary Stuart Road.
The structural soundness of the pavement was established through the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
test, the results of which were simulated into the Overlay Maintenance Design. For the design period
considered – 5 years – it was established that an overlay was required in all sections of the road. Four
alternatives were presented to this effect. A choice can be made on the alternatives depending on the
available technology and the economy of the project.
5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
5.3.1 Drainage Improvement
The drainage system should be redesigned to incorporate Green Engineering Techniques. One key
aspect of Green Engineering is to preserve and promote riparian areas and drainage regimes that
support them.
Current practice requires rain falling on impermeable surfaces (such as the Tennis Court and Mary Stuart

pavements), drained into existing trenches, and disposed directly into waterways at velocities and
volumes many times greater than predevelopment rates, scouring stream beds and leading to uneven
base flows.
Green infrastructure reverses this by encouraging infiltration of rainwater into the ground, where its
naturally filtered before reaching the stream, and also regulating the rate of entry into the stream
system, mimicking predevelopment forest land hydrology.
One of the largest generators of excess storm water in any municipality is the paved street system,
typical curb‐and‐gutter systems, which prevent water from being absorbed into roadside soils.
Infiltration is encouraged through the use of permeable surfaces and by eliminating curbs thus allowing
water to infiltrate directly into the infiltration zone, or swale. Only when the swales are saturated does
water drain into a system of shallow perforated pipes laid into the infiltration zones. This pipe system
connects all infiltration devices and moves water to retention/treatment ponds or artificial wetlands.
Paved street widths for local and collector streets in plan range from 6m to 11.3m. Rights of way for
these streets range from between 17m and 22m, depending on specific infrastructure, servicing and
amenity requirements of each individual corridor. Street trees are planted within these rights of way
such that 60% of the street section will be shaded at maturity. These urban forest trees are an important
element of the streetscape and a significant factor in the maintenance of watershed health
5.3.2 Side Walks
Arising from a great need to accommodate disabled persons on the side walks, it is recommended that
the curb be redesigned with ramps to ease movement of wheel chairs on and off the pavement thus
increasing pedestrian safety.
5.3.3 Road Lighting
The current poor road side lighting needs to be supplemented with more street lights to improve the
lighting condition, and thus security.
6 REFERENCES
1. C A O’Flaherty, Hodder Headline Plc (1988), Highway Engineering, Third Edition,
2. E.J Yoder & W.Witezak ……………
3. Huang………….
4. John Wiley& sons, Inc Highway engineering, international 7 th edition, (2004)2.2
5. Overseas Road Notes, www.google.co.ug
6. P. M. Condon and K. Isaac, ICE Municipal Engineer 156, (2003), Green Municipal
Engineering for Sustainable Communities,
7. R. J. Salter & N. B. Hounsell, Highway Traffic Analysis and Design, Third Edition, Macmillan
Press Ltd. (1996).

Chapter 1 PHE

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 1 PHE

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

[Maintenance Design of Tennis Court and Mary Stuart Roads]

Our thanks go out to the soil laboratory personnel, in mention, Mr. Fred Mukasa and Mr. Patrick Hamba

And to God Almighty, for the gift of life and endless opportunities.

3.3 OVERLAY DESIGN ................................................................................................................... 25

Table 2.1 Classification of Sub grades ...................................................................................................... 8

AASHTO ‐ American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Figure 1.1 MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA

The specific objectives of the study were;

1.4 SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES

Imprint area; A = πa 2

Load = area x pressure; P = A x p

a) Sub grades – CBR, modulus of sub grade reaction and resilient modulus

Table 2.1 Classification of Sub grades

Cement treated gravels can mobilise a UCS after 7 days of curing of between (2 – 3.5 ) MPa.

Figure 2.1 Surface Coarse options a) Single Surface dressing; b) Double Surface dressing

Resilient Structural Modified Structural

Figure 2.2 Monograph

This is the dynamic equivalent of elastic modulus of materials in the pavement structure. In reality, most

Wearing course structural number SN1 = a1h1

Sub base, base and Wearing coarse structural number SN3 = a1h1 + a2h2 + a3h3

Table 2.2 Nominal Values for Layer coefficients

a) surface dressing a1 = 0.20

b) asphalt concrete a1 = 0.35

a) bitumen macadam a2 = 0.20

i) on natural gravel sub base a2 = 0.14

ii) on stabilised sub base a2 = 0.18

i) 3.5 – 5.0 (UCS) a2 = 0.18

ii) 2.0 – 3.5 (UCS) a2 = 0.14

a) natural gravel (CBR > 30) a3 = 0.11

i) UCS > 2 a3 = 0.16

ii) UCS 0.7 ‐ 2 a3 = 0.12

2.2.2 MIX DESIGN

Mix design of pre‐ mix materials has the following purposes;

Figure 2.3 Graphs of stability, bulk density and void ratio against binder content

Table 3.1 Axle loads for the different vehicle types

Table 3.2 Equivalent Axle Load Factors

Figure 3.1 Positions of traffic counters

KEY: Station 1 Station 5

technique of determining the in‐place density of soil and related materials in base courses, roadways,

a) Dry sand was sieved through No. 20 sieve and was set aside for the test.

3.2.6.2 Sieve Analysis

e) The analysis of this is shown in Appendix B5 and the soil characterised accordingly.

Tables 3.3 and 3.4 and figure 3.2 below were obtained from Over seas Road notes (ORN 18).

Table 3.3 Traffic Load Classes (TLC)

0.2 – 0.5 TLC 05

Table 3.4 Determination of required structural number

Figure 3.2 Chart of Overlay options

Table 4.1 Laboratory Tests

Test No. Test Purpose Reference

1 Sand Replacement To determine the in‐situ bulk density of the Appendix B1

2 Cassagrande To determine the Liquid Limit of the soil Appendix B2

3 Rolling Test To determine the Plastic Limit of the soil Appendix B3

5 Sieve Analysis To determine the particle grading according Appendix B5

Sample Chainage Bulk density Liquid Limit Plasticity Moisture %age AASHTO General Remarks

1 0 + 310 2.55 30.82 16.18 12.2 33.7 A‐2‐6 Generally good soil

2 0 + 520 2.35 30.82 21.16 13.5 ‐ ‐ Soil is plastic since the PI

4.3 FIELD TEST RESULTS

Sample ID Chainage Bulk density, ρb = Mb/Vb

Sample 1 Vb1 0 + 310 2.55

Sample 2 Vb2 0 + 520 2.35

Sample 3 Vb3 0 + 924 2.85

Sample 4 Vb4 0 + 953 2.21

The lengths (L1 & L2) were measured as shown in Figure 4.1 below using a measuring tape.

The average diameter of each pothole was calculated as (ф1 + ф2)/ 2, and the total potholed area of each