Final Year Project, Iga Dan

FINAL YEAR PROJECT:
DESIGN OF A SAND SEAL FOR A LOW VOLUME GRAVEL

ROAD CASE STUDY: KIRA-KITO ROAD

Miss May Namutebi
MAIN SUPERVISOR
..

Mr. Kaddu David
CO-SUPERVISOR
.

Project Report submitted as a partial fulfillment for the award of a bachelor of Engineering in the
College of Engineering Design, Art and Technology (CEDAT).
June 2012
FINAL YEAR PROJECT 2011/2012
i | P a g e
Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering
DECLARATION

I , IGA DAN, the undersigned do solemnly declare to the best of my knowledge and effort
that I did the final year project and that the work herein this report is entirely mine and has
never been submitted by anyone to any institution for the award of academic awards. Any errors,
mistakes and omissions and others of that kind are of my personal failure and I welcome any
genuine criticisms

Signature Date ..

ii | P a g e
DEDICATION

To my dear mummy, Miss Naluyima Miriam who has sacrificed and struggled to bring me
thus far; without her I wouldnt have made it to this great institution.
iii | P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There are very many people I would like to thank, especially;
The Almighty God for having given me the greatest gift of Life to go through the industrial
training period successfully and for the constant provision.
To my final year project supervisors, am indebted to both of you for the technical advice,
support, encouragement, counsel, guidance, criticisms, corrections, the time and resources you
offered me during my entire project period and for the knowledge you imparted to me which has
helped me make this wonderful report, thank you so much.
My great mother Miss. Naluyima Miriam and my whole family for the great support and
encouragement they offered me.
The CTDD department of CEDAT for selecting this project for funding and for the financial
resources extended towards the successful execution of all these works, without your support,
completion of this project would really have been so hard.

iv | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ................................................................................................................................... I
DEDICATION ...................................................................................................................................... II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................................III
TABLE OF FIGURES: ...................................................................................................................... VII
TABLE OF TABLES: ....................................................................................................................... VIII
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................................... IX
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem statement ....................................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Main objective .............................................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Specific objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 2
1.5 Justification .................................................................................................................................................. 3
1.6 Scope of the study ........................................................................................................................................ 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................ 5
2.1 Benefits and selection of surfacing ............................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Low cost surfacing on low-volume roads ...................................................................................................... 5
2.3 Surfacing types available .............................................................................................................................. 6
2.3.1 Fog seal ................................................................................................................................................ 6
2.3.2 Priming ................................................................................................................................................ 6
2.3.3 Primer seal ........................................................................................................................................... 6
2.3.4 Sand seal .............................................................................................................................................. 7
2.3.5 Surface dressing ................................................................................................................................... 7
2.3.6 Slurry seal ............................................................................................................................................ 7
2.3.7 Otta seal .............................................................................................................................................. 7
2.3.8 Penetration macadam .......................................................................................................................... 8
2.3.9 Premixed gravel macadam/Gravel emulsified mix ................................................................................. 8
v | P a g e
2.4 Previous studies done about sand seal designs............................................................................................. 8
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 10
3.1 Traffic Assessment ...................................................................................................................................... 10
3.1.1 Estimating Traffic Flows ...................................................................................................................... 10
3.1.2 Traffic forecasting .............................................................................................................................. 10
3.1.3 Determination of cumulative equivalent standard axles ..................................................................... 10
3.2 Inventory and general condition ................................................................................................................. 11
3.3 Structural Evaluation .................................................................................................................................. 11
3.4 Rainfall Assessment .................................................................................................................................... 13
3.5 Laboratory tests.......................................................................................................................................... 13
4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS:................................................................................................. 14
4.1 Structural Evaluation .................................................................................................................................. 14
4.1.1 DCP test results .................................................................................................................................. 14
4.1.2 Subgrade classification: ...................................................................................................................... 15
4.2 Traffic Assessment: ..................................................................................................................................... 15
4.2.1 Traffic count results ........................................................................................................................... 15
4.2.2 Cumulative Equivalent Standard Axle Loads ........................................................................................ 17
4.2.3 Traffic classification: ........................................................................................................................... 18
4.3 Rainfall Assessment .................................................................................................................................... 18
4.3.1 Weinert Value .................................................................................................................................... 18
4.4 Laboratory tests.......................................................................................................................................... 19
4.4.1 MDD results: ...................................................................................................................................... 19
Chainage 0+010 ........................................................................................................................................... 19
Chainage 0+110 ........................................................................................................................................... 20
Chainage 0+300:.......................................................................................................................................... 20
4.4.2 Gradation Results:.................................................................................................................................. 21
Chainage 0+010 ........................................................................................................................................... 21
Chainage 0+110 ........................................................................................................................................... 22
Chainage 0+300 ........................................................................................................................................... 22
4.4.3 Plasticity Index results: ....................................................................................................................... 23
Chainage 0+010:.......................................................................................................................................... 23
Chainage 0+110 ........................................................................................................................................... 24
Chainage 0+300 ........................................................................................................................................... 25
4.5 Analysis: Layer thickness Design ................................................................................................................. 25
vi | P a g e
CHAPTER 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMNEDATIONS .................................................. 26
5.1 Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 26
5.2 Conclusions: ............................................................................................................................................... 26
5.2.1 Inventory of the existing road condition ............................................................................................. 26
5.2.2 Traffic usage of the road:.................................................................................................................... 26
5.2.3 Subgrade characteristics of the existing road ...................................................................................... 26
5.2.4 The design of the appropriate sand seal ............................................................................................. 27
New Pavement Structure............................................................................................................................. 27
New Pavement Structure............................................................................................................................. 28
Drainage ..................................................................................................................................................... 28
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 29
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 30
Appendix I: DCP Test Data and Results: ........................................................................................................ 30
Layer boundary graphs and CBR graphs ............................................................................................................... 36
Appendix II: Kituza Coffee Research Meteorological Station Data ................................................................ 40
Appendix III Laboratory tests data: .............................................................................................................. 41
Appendix IV: Design Charts............................................................................................................................ 49
Appendix IV: Photographs of the project execution ...................................................................................... 55
vii | P a g e
TABLE OF FIGURES:
FIGURE 1 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER ............................................................................................................ 12
FIGURE 2 SUMMARY OF THE TRAFFIC COUNTS DATA USED TO OBTAIN THE ADT ...................................................... 16
FIGURE 3 PROCTOR CURVE FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 .................................................................................................. 19
FIGURE 6 SIEVE ANALYSIS FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 ................................................................................................... 21
FIGURE 7 SIEVE ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR CHAINAGE 0+110 ..................................................................................... 22
FIGURE 8 PLASTICITY INDEX RESULTS FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 .................................................................................. 23
FIGURE 9 PLASTICITY INDEX RESULTS FOR CHAINAGE 0+110 .................................................................................. 24
FIGURE 10 PLASTICITY INDEX RESULTS FOR CHAINAGE 0+300 ................................................................................ 25
FIGURE 11 CBR VARIATION WITH THE CHAINAGE ALONG THE ROAD ....................................................................... 26
FIGURE 12 DIAGRAMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE NEW PAVEMENT STRUCTURE .................................................... 27
FIGURE 13 LAYER BOUNDARIES AND CBR VARIATION FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 .......................................................... 36
FIGURE 14 LAYER BOUNDARIES AND CBR VARIATION FOR CHAINAGE 0+110 .......................................................... 36
FIGURE 15 BOUNDARIES AND CBR VARIATION FOR CHAINAGE 0+210 ..................................................................... 37
FIGURE 19 HISTOGRAM SHOWING THE BASE SBR (%) ............................................................................................ 39
FIGURE 20 ASSEMBLING OF THE DCP TEST EQUIPMENT .......................................................................................... 55
FIGURE 21 APPLYING BLOWS TO THE SOIL TO GET PENETRATIONS ........................................................................... 55
FIGURE 22 RECORDING OF PENTRATIONS ............................................................................................................... 55
FIGURE 23 MEASURING OF THE DISTANCES FROM ONE CHAINAGE TO ANOTHER ....................................................... 55
FIGURE 24 THE KIRA-KITO ROAD CONDITION......................................................................................................... 55
FIGURE 25 RULER USED TO MEASURE THE PENETRATION ........................................................................................ 56
FIGURE 26 SAMPLING TO OBTAIN SAMPLES FOR LABORATORY TESTS....................................................................... 56
viii | P a g e
TABLE OF TABLES:
TABLE 1 RECOMMENDED SPACINGS FOR DCP ........................................................................................................ 11
TABLE 2 LABORATORY TESTS CARRIED OUT IN THE PROJECT EXECUTION................................................................. 13
TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF THE DCP TEST RESULTS FOR THE DIFFERENT CHAINAGES ..................................................... 14
TABLE 4 SUBGRADE STRENGTH CLASSIFICATION .................................................................................................... 15
TABLE 5 OBTAINING THE CUMULATIVE EQUIVALENT STANDARD AXLES LOADS ON THE ROAD ................................. 17
TABLE 6 TRAFFIC CLASSIFICATION BASING ON THE RANGE OF ESAS ....................................................................... 18
TABLE 7 PROPOSED NEW PAVEMENT STRUCTURE OF THE ROAD ............................................................................. 27
TABLE 8 PROPOSED SURFACING OPTIONS ............................................................................................................... 28
TABLE 9 THICKNESS AND REQUIRED CBR VALUES OF THE NEW PAVEMENT STRCUTURE .......................................... 28
TABLE 10 UK DCP TEST RESULTS FOR ALL THE CHAINAGES (0+010 TO 0+500) ....................................................... 30
TABLE 11 MONTHLY EVAPORATION DATA FOR KITUZA COFFEE RESEARCH STATION ................................................ 40
TABLE 12 MONTHLY MAXIMUM FALL OF RAINFALL FOR KITUZA STATION .............................................................. 40
TABLE 13 MONTLY RAINFALL TOTALS OF KITUZA STATION.................................................................................... 40
TABLE 14 TEST RESULTS FROM MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY OF THE SOIL FOR CHAINAGE 0+010\ ................................. 41
TABLE 15 TEST RESULTS FOR PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS TEST (BS 1377: PART 2) FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 ................... 43
TABLE 16 TEST RESULTS FOR THE MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIOS FOR CHAINAGE 0+210 ........................................ 44
TABLE 18 TEST RESULTS FOR THE MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIOS OF THE SOIL FOR CHAINAGE 0+300 ...................... 47

ix | P a g e
ABSTRACT
This report consists of a detailed proposed design of a sand seal for a low volume gravel road
case study being Kira-Kito road which stretches a distance of 1.5km. The main objective was to
design a sand seal. This was done by carrying out an inventory of the existing road condition,
determining the traffic usage of the road and evaluating the sub-grade characteristics of the
existing road.
In-situ field tests such as the DCP test, laboratory tests including; Moisture relations, Particle
size determination, maximum density test and plasticity index tests were some of the methods
that were used to analyse the structural strength and the existing material properties of the soil.
From the traffic counts the cumulative equivalent axles were obtained as 0.502 million ESA thus
a traffic class of T2 LV6, the strength was observed to lie mainly from 15 to 29, hence a
subgrade classification of S5. From these results and others such as the maximum evaporation
and maximum rainfall were used to design the sand seal.
1 | P a g e
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Low-volume rural roads in developing countries are vital to the socio-economic well being of
communities by providing access to schools, clinics, jobs, markets, neighboring communities
and the higher order road network. Therefore, whilst these roads tend to carry relatively low
levels of traffic, they play an important role in contributing to poverty alleviation, social and
economic development and the facilitation of schemes aimed at improving rural livelihoods.
(Done et al TRL, 2001).
Kira-Kito road is a low volume rural road. It is a gravel road, 10 km long located in Kira Town
Council, Wakiso district, Uganda. This road is a low volume national road which is under Kira
Town Council and is very important to Kira town council for access and mobility.
The rural poor in Kira need reliable access for affordable transport or services (both motorized
and non-motorized) such as bicycles, motorcycles, minibuses, buses, cars, whether owned or
hired. Even if a vehicle ride is too expensive for them, they will still depend on the transporters
that bring the medicine and teachers to the village, or carry farm produce to markets. The
challenge is therefore to provide and maintain this rural access for the low traffic currently in
use, on a sustainable basis within the limited resources available.
Many kilometers of this road in become impassable during the wet season cutting many
communities off from access to schools, markets, clinics and job opportunities. In addition, the
cost of operating vehicles on this road during the remainder of the year is disproportionately high
in relation to the service offered. Of equal or greater impact is the unsustainability of replacing
the gravel lost from these roads under environmental and traffic influences.
Using the conventional economic analysis and pavement design techniques, paving of this road
can not be justified. However, when environmental and the social benefits are considered,
upgrading of this road carrying traffic as low as 20 vehicles per day to a sand sealed road can be
justified, particularly because large communities are affected.
2 | P a g e
1.2 Problem statement
Community accessibility is temporarily improved by the provision of a gravel road access but
only for the road to steadily deteriorate back to the poor earth standards through the absence of
adequate maintenance. This has led to the lack of year round access to the many rural
communities in this area which is a serious constraint to social and economic development, and
poverty reduction. Poor access limits the effectiveness of agricultural, commercial, educational
and health initiatives though unreliable travel and high unit transport costs for crops, goods,
services and people.
Gravel is a sacrificial, wasting layer that is rapidly depleted along this road every year
depending on such factors as traffic, climate and terrain. Thus without re-gravelling, the entire
layer can be lost within 3-5 years (SATCC, 2003).
The cost of periodic re-gravelling and routine maintenance of gravel roads can be very high. Re-
gravelling costs are typically of the order of US$ 5,000 to US$ 30,000 per km per year
depending on such factors as width and thickness of gravel layer, gravel quality, haulage
distance, haul conditions, technology used, location etc. In addition, routine maintenance costs
related to grading/reshaping, patching and off-carriageway operations are typically of the order
of US$ 2,000 to US$ 3,000 per km per year (Callao, R.S. 1999).
Dust generation in dry weather causes adverse impacts in terms of being a health hazard for
communities living adjacent to the road as well as causing pedestrian, animal and vehicle safety
problems related to visibility and overtaking movements. In addition, dust emissions cause
damage to crops and natural habitats.
Gravel roads are often slippery and dangerous in wet weather, especially in steep terrain, causing
access problems for communities. They are also susceptible to erosion causing silting of drains
and water courses. Chemical treatment options can be hazardous.
1.3 Main objective
To design sand seal for Kira-Kito gravel road.
1.4 Specific objectives
a) To carryout an inventory of the existing road condition
b) To determine the traffic usage of the road
3 | P a g e
c) To evaluate the sub-grade characteristics of the existing road
d) To design an appropriate sand seal to accommodate the traffic
1.5 Justification
There are serious constraints to the use of gravel in Kira due to factors relating to material
quality, material availability, climate, terrain, drainage provision and maintenance. There is
overall significant gravel loss and unsuitable deterioration. Thus, it is expected that the use of a
sand sealing would provide appropriate, economical and sustainable alternatives to natural gravel
in this region and the Uganda road sector.
This alternative, involving use of locally available sand may be constructed by small local
enterprises, using low-capital, labour based and light equipment methods. Communities could
also use some of the techniques to improve their own access. Thus the design of a sand seal is
very necessary to pave a way for the application of this sealing alternative.
The sealed surface will have lower maintenance requirements than gravel, not only in terms of
cost but also by reducing the need for imported heavy equipment to transport and compact. In
addition, a number of other strategic issues will be satisfied, which include;
Improved sustainability
Durability in the expected traffic and environmental conditions
Use of locally available materials
Techniques with low capital investment (limited or simple equipment needs) and
manageable by local contractors
Use of local labour and skills
Low volume roads tend to have a greater social and environmental impact as compared to high
volume roads because they connect small towns and rural communities, serve as farm-to-
market/forest-to-market roads, and provide links to parks and recreational areas hence need for
emphasis to be directed to these roads too, which is the reason for considering this project for my
final year.
4 | P a g e
1.6 Scope of the study
The study was carried out on Kira-Kito road and was limited to the first 600m from Kira Primary
School because of economy and to minimize on the challenge of ambiguity which may be caused
by too much work in a short period of time.
The study involved carrying out a traffic assessment of the area for five consecutive days at the
peak hours from 6 am to 9am, 12pm to 3pm and finally from 5pm to 7pm.
Soil samples were obtained from the road at 100m intervals to a depth of up to 500mm and from
the Right hand side, centerline and left hand side respectively.
This project was limited to design of a sand seal only.
5 | P a g e
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction:
The literature review includes Include some introductory remarks about this chapter, some kind
of summary of what this chapter is about,
2.1 Benefits and selection of surfacing
The construction of an improved road surface can give a range of benefits. These benefits must
be compared with the costs of providing the surface. The primary benefits include:
Waterproof surface that is durable in both wet and dry weather;
Smoother surface (Sampson, 1995) and uniform appearance;
Decreased rate of deterioration resulting in a reduced maintenance requirement (gravel
typically loses 25 mm per year), (Nicholls and Spon, 1998); and
Increased skid resistance (Millard, 1993; TRL, 2000)
The decision to surface a road with any type of bituminous seal can depend on factors such as
the type and condition of the existing surface and strength of the pavement in relation to the
traffic it carries (Botswana, 1999). The quality and availability of materials also needs to be
consider along with the geometry of the road and the local climate (SABITA, 1992; TRL, 2000;
TRH, 1998).
Financial and economic factors are of course important in assessing whether to apply a surface
treatment to a road (Botswana, 1999). The initial construction cost and subsequent maintenance
costs must be assessed against the expected lifespan of the road and benefits to road users. What
may be thought lesser benefits such as riding quality, safety (from improved surface texture) and
environmental improvements (noise, dust) are no less important when justifying upgrading
unpaved roads and tracks.
Ultimately the local construction and maintenance capability must be considered and the
suitability of the construction technique for labour-based methods.
2.2 Low cost surfacing on low-volume roads
The justification (technical, economic, and environmental) for a surfacing on a road which
carries high levels of traffic is clear. However, there are considerable and growing arguments in
favor of extending the use of surfacings to roads with much lower traffic levels of less than 400
6 | P a g e
vpd (MELTC, 2011). For simple economic reasons, surfacings applied to low-volume roads will
tend to be low cost, although some cost/benefit analysis will always be useful.
Surfaced roads are particularly effective in reducing environmental damage. They can be used to
prevent dust pollution, particularly in towns and villages (Sampson, 1995, Greening et al, 1999).
They reduce the demand for increasingly scarce gravel materials and even in those areas where
materials are available they improve the environment through decreased borrow pit activity
(Rolt, 1995, Kenya, 1993). They also prevent the sedimentation of fine materials that result from
run-off of rainwater from un-surfaced roads (Sampson, 1995).
Finally, and most importantly, it is extremely important that rural roads provide all weather
access for the local community. In some circumstances the only way to ensure this is to provide
effective drainage and seal the road on, at least, some short sections of the road. If this is not
done then as the road continues to deteriorate it may reach a state where access may be totally
lost (Rolt, 1995).
2.3 Surfacing types available
2.3.1 Fog seal
Fog seals use bitumen emulsions and are used to enrich ageing bituminous surfacing and prevent
chipping loss. The fog seal is usually blinded with a layer of fines to prevent pick up by traffic
(ARRB, 1995; TRL, 2000).
2.3.2 Priming
Normally used prior to placing another surfacing for sealing small cracks and providing
adhesion. Priming waterproofs and reduces dust but lasts only a few weeks. Cut-back bitumens
are normally used but emulsions have been trialed, but the results are not yet known (ARRB,
1995) and morever, cut-back bitumens due to environmental concerns are no longer
recommended for use.
2.3.3 Primer seal
This is similar to a sand seal but is made to less rigorous specifications, is less durable having a
life expectancy of 1-3 years (Overby, 1982). It is normally constructed with a cut-back as the
binder but emulsions can be used in conjunction with small aggregate sizes (5 7mm), in fine
and warm conditions, when it provides good adhesion for the aggregate (ARRB, 1995).
7 | P a g e
2.3.4 Sand seal
This seal consists of first an optional prime coat (1mm); a bitumen layer (1.5mm, cutback
bitumen, emulsion) followed by a graded sand layer (3-5mm) which must then is compacted.
(Beusch et al, 1997). Performance can be improved if a second seal is applied after 3 months
and is best for traffic levels up to 400 vpd. A life of 4-5 years can be expected (van der Walt,
1979).
2.3.5 Surface dressing
Surface dressing comprises a thin film of bitumen sprayed onto the road surface and then
covered with a layer of stone chippings (Beusch et al, 1997). The thin film of binder acts as a
waterproofing layer preventing the entry of surface water into the road structure. The stone
chippings protect this film of binder from damage by vehicle tyres, and form a durable, skid-
resistant and dust-free wearing surface. It can provide an effective and economical running
surface for newly constructed road pavements. Roads carrying up to 1000 vehicles/lane/day are
successfully surfaced with multiple surface dressings (Overby, 1982).
2.3.6 Slurry seal
Slurry seals are laid cold and are a mixture of fine aggregates, Portland cement filler, bitumen
emulsion and additional water (BSI, 1984) (ASTM, 1990). When freshly mixed they have a thick
creamy consistency and can be spread to a thickness of 5 to 10 mm. They are often used over a
single surface dressing to produce a Cape seal. Slurry mixes are best made and spread by
purpose made machines but can be suitable for labour-based construction (Emery et al, 1994)
(SABITA, 1993) (Zimbabwe, 1998).
2.3.7 Otta seal
An Otta seal consists of a layer of binder followed by a layer of aggregate that is extensively
rolled into the binder using a pneumatic tyred roller or loaded trucks(Overby, 1982). It is
different to surface dressing in that a graded gravel or crushed aggregate containing all sizes,
including filler, is used instead of single sized chippings. It depends for its success on the
mechanism of the binder being squeezed up through the aggregate by the action of the rolling.
Due to the fines in the aggregate, 2 to 3 days of pneumatic-tyred compaction (rollers or traffic) is
required to fully coat all the particles. There is no formal design procedure but recommendations
based on case studies have been published (Overby, 1999).
8 | P a g e
2.3.8 Penetration macadam
Macadam is a paving technique developed by a Scottish Engineer called John Macadam at the
beginning of the 19
th
century using broken stones of various sizes combined together and placed
in layers. Various developments of this technique are used today. Penetration macadam consists
of layers of broken or crushed stones of size up to 80mm, interspersed with applications of
heated bitumen to grout and seal the surface. It is laid as a waterproof surface on a previously
prepared roadbase. The effect is to achieve a matrix of keyed stones grouted and sealed with
bitumen to a depth of about 60 80mm. The process requires only a basic bitumen heater-
distributor and an 8-10 tonne deadweight roller. Labour methods can be used to place and spread
the materials. Applications of bitumen are high at 7 9 kg/m. Other types of bitumen surface
can achieve a durable waterproof surface with lower bitumen application rates. Alternative
bitumen emulsion surfaces can avoid the requirement for heating with corresponding safety
benefits.
2.3.9 Premixed gravel macadam/Gravel emulsified mix
Gravel aggregate is mixed with an anionic emulsion either by hand or in a small drum mixer
such as a portable cement mixer with the aggregate gravel specification the same as an Otta seal
(Balmaceda&Horak, 1997). After mixing, the material is spread on a primed road base and rolled
in the same way as an Otta seal. The surfacing is comparable to an Otta seal.
2.4 Previous studies done about sand seal designs
MELTC (Uganda) in conjunction with DANIDA under consultancy of TRL and PROME were
the first to carry out studies about Sand seals and work include; Development of training
modules, conducting training and establishment of demonstration sites for low-cost sealing of
roads in Uganda. The project entailed the following activities:
Prepare a training curriculum and training materials covering materials investigation,
appropriate design options for pavements and low-cost structures for labour-based sealed
roads, sealing procedures and techniques, site safety, maintenance of labour-based sealed
roads and any other information as the consultant may deem necessary for achieving the
training objectives;
Train trainers at MELTC,
9 | P a g e
Develop the necessary technical documentation (manuals) for use by local practitioners
including tender documents,
Develop quality control measures for the low-cost sealing of roads.
This study project is different from the work done under MELTC because it is aimed at
designing a sand seal for Kira-Kito road putting into consideration the local, topographical and
environmental conditions in Wakiso and will put into account the local available materials in or
near Mukono.
The Institutional Cooperation between Roads Department, Ministry of Works, Kenya and
Norwegian Road Research Laboratory (NRRL) carried out an appraisal study in Kenya on the
Low-cost Pavement which started in 1982, which was carried out by the Norwegian Road
Research Laboratory (NRRL) and Materials Branch of Ministry of Public Works. The initial
contracts for the project were in 1980 between the Ministry of Works, NRRL and the Norwegian
Agency for Development NORAD. The main objective of the Low-cost Pavement was to
provide specification for construction materials to be utilized on the low volume roads in the
regions without too good quality materials. It was intended that by utilizing local materials the
project would achieve road pavements (Sand seal inclusive) with both acceptable life expectancy
and reasonable maintenance costs. The construction of the trial section started in June 1983 on
the arrival of the first project co-coordinator. Preliminary investigations consisted of gravel and
hard stone surveys together with digging of test trenches. From August 1983 to August 1985 a
total of 16 trail sections were constructed. An additional 6 sections were located adjacent to the
already constructed sections in Kenya.

10 | P a g e
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Include a summary of what this chapter is about

3.1 Traffic Assessment
3.1.1 Estimating Traffic Flows
A 5-day classified traffic count was carried out along the road with the counts distinguishing
between vehicle categories basing on the MoWT road design manual which stipulates a period of
seven days; reason for carrying out only five days was because of consistency of results and
constraints in facilitation. The counts of the traffic were carried out in both directions and the
different vehicle categories included:
Non motorised traffic which included people (Children, adults)
Cars, including passenger cars, vans, minibuses taxis, pick-ups, 4WD vehicles
Buses, including medium and large buses above 24 passenger seats
Light trucks, including small and medium sized trucks with 2 axles.
Medium trucks, including larger trucks with 3 or 4 axles.
Heavy trucks, including trucks with more than 4 axles and articulated trucks
3.1.2 Traffic forecasting
In order to estimate the traffic that will use the road over its design life, a growth rate was
projected basing on Ministry of Works Manual and basing on the value of 4.5% per annum used
by MELTC in designing for low cost sealing options.
3.1.3 Determination of cumulative equivalent standard axles
In order to determine the cumulative equivalent standard axles over the design life of the road,
the following procedure was followed:
i. The daily traffic flow was determined for each class of vehicle weighed using the results
of the traffic survey.
ii. The average daily traffic flow for each class of vehicle was then obtained also.
11 | P a g e
iii. A forecast of the traffic flow for each class of vehicle was made so as to determine the
total traffic in each class that will travel over the road during the design life
iv. The mean equivalence factors of each class of vehicle were determined from the results
of an axle load survey.
v. The products of the cumulative traffic flows for each class of vehicle over the design life
of the road and the mean equivalence factor for that class were then calculated and added
together to give the cumulative equivalent standard axle loading for each direction.
3.2 Inventory and general condition
Moving along the existing road, geometric data, shoulder condition data, side drain data,
and carriageway surface condition data was observed to be in a relatively good condition
since the road had just been regraveled and a few defects were observed which basically
constituted;
o Potholes,
o Oversize material,
3.3 Structural Evaluation
The structural assessment was carried out in situ by use of a dynamic cone penetrometer
(DCP) shown in figure 1 below. The spacing for carrying out the DCP test along the road
was taken as 100m for the entire length of section of 500m because the section my
project is concentrating on is the first 100m thus wasnt necessary to carry out structural
assessment on the entire section.
The procedure of carrying out the DCP test was as per Dynamic Cone Penetrometer tests
and analysis, (Colin Jones, 2007)
The recommended spacings for conducting DCP tests are shown in Error! Reference
source not found. below.
Table 1 Recommended spacings for DCP
Objective Minimum Test Spacing
Routine testing for the rehabilitation of paved roads 500m or less
Areas of distress on paved roads 100m or less
12 | P a g e
Upgrading of gravel roads to sealed roads 500m or less
Design of spot improvements 50m or less
Adopted from TRL Project Report Number: PR/INT/277/04

Figure 1 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

13 | P a g e
3.4 Rainfall Assessment
Annual rainfall estimates and the maximum evaporation data was obtained from Meteorological
Department, Ministry of land, water and environment and are shown in chapter 4.
3.5 Laboratory tests
Sampling was carried out concurrently as the DCP test was being carried out and approximately
35 kg were taken per point. This was to make sure that the material was enough to carry out the
necessary tests.
In the laboratory samples of the base material and the subgrade material were be tested for the
tests indicated in the laboratory except the California Bearing ratio because of many reasons
including:
DCP test gave us consistent values for the CBR and thus it was satisfactory to rely on
those results hence not very necessary to carry out the laboratory CBR
Lack of enough resources especially time as many tests were to be carried out and yet
CBR moulds were not easily accessible
The tests which were carried out included the following the procedures indicated in the British
Standards indicated and are summarised in Table 2.
Table 2 Laboratory tests carried out in the project execution
Laboratory Tests Standard
Compaction test BS 1377: Part 4: 1990
Moisture Content BS 1377: Part 2: 1990
Atterbergs Limits BS 1377: Part 2: 1990
Particle Size Distribution BS 1377: Part 2: 1990
14 | P a g e
4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS:
4.1 Structural Evaluation
4.1.1 DCP test results
The detailed test data obtained while carrying out the DCP test is shown in the Appendix 1 and
the test results can be summarised in the table 3 below obtained from the layer boundary and
CBR graphs in the Appendix 1
Table 3 Summary of the DCP test results for the different chainages
Chainage 0+010
No. CBR (%) Thickness(mm) Depth (mm) Position Strength coeff.
1 31 432 432 Base 0.07
2 8 139 571 Sub-base 0.06
3 22 127 698 Subgrade

Chainage 0+110
1 120 554 554 Base 0.14
2 45 134 688 Sub-base 0.11
3 24 231 919 Subgrade

Chainage 0+210
1 87 329 329 Base 0.13
2 13 117 446 Sub-base 0.08
3 19 353 799 Subgrade

Chainage 0+300
1 68 364 364 Base 0.12
2 10 120 484 Sub-base 0.07
3 20 320 804 Subgrade

Chainage 0+400
1 96 313 313 Base 0.14
2 26 217 530 Sub-base 0.1
3 20 268 798 Subgrade

Chainage 0+500
15 | P a g e
1 59 226 226 Base 0.11
2 37 344 570 Sub-base 0.1
3 29 241 811 Subgrade

4.1.2 Subgrade classification:
From the results of the DCP tests as analysed using the UKDCP software above, it was
established that the Subgrade strength class of the road was mainly lying from 15 to 29 thus the
subgrade class of the road from the specification given in the TRL road note 31 shown in the
table 4 below is S5.
Table 4 Subgrade strength classification

(MoWT Road Design Manual, 2010)
4.2 Traffic Assessment:
4.2.1 Traffic count results
The traffic counts were carried out for five consecutive days as shown in the traffic count sheets
appended to the document in appendix VI. The data was analysed as shown in the figure 2
below to obtain the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) indicated in the last column as the Mean per
day.
16 | P a g e

Figure 2 Summary of the traffic counts data used to obtain the ADT
6-9am 12-3pm 5-8pm
Mean
per
3hrs
mean
per
12hrs
6-9am 12-3pm 5-8pm
Mean
per 3hrs
mean
per
12hrs
6-9am 12-3pm 5-8pm
Mean
per
3hrs
mean
per 12hrs
6-9am 12-3pm5-8pm
Mean
per
3hrs
mean
per
12hrs
6-9am 12-3pm 5-8pm
Mean
per
3hrs
mean
per
12hrs
Total mean per
12 hrs for 5 days
Mean per
day
Pedestrians
218 91 175 161 645 255 101 173 176 705 223 105 200 176 704 193 132 202 176 703 122 124 134 127 507 3264 653
Bicycles 17 10 20 16 63 11 12 13 12 48 6 9 6 7 28 11 3 11 8 33 6 4 4 5 19 191 38
Motorcycles 133 107 156 132 528 130 98 172 133 533 152 112 140 135 539 174 127 211 171 683 132 143 121 132 528 2811 562
Saloon cars and taxis
42 33 43 39 157 37 42 39 39 157 39 37 41 39 156 51 31 56 46 184 23 42 21 29 115 769 154
Light Goods Vans:
(Pickups, 4WD)
61 41 49 50 201 71 43 50 55 219 63 62 51 59 235 54 46 63 54 217 41 39 26 35 141 1013 203
Small Bus: Minibuses and
Matatus
16 8 10 11 45 14 11 6 10 41 7 12 5 8 32 4 13 6 8 31 2 2 0 1 5 155 31
Medium Bus: Coasters
3 0 1 1 5 2 0 2 1 5 2 0 4 2 8 2 0 4 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 27 5
Buses
Light Single Unit Trucks:
Dynas and tractors
5 18 4 9 36 3 14 7 8 32 7 21 3 10 41 5 11 10 9 35 11 13 16 13 53 197 39
Medium-Large Single Unit
Trucks: Lorries, fusos
0 6 2 3 11 0 3 0 1 4 0 2 0 1 3 0 5 0 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 24 5
3 Hour Total 495 314 460 423 1692 523 324 462 436.3 1745 499 360 450 436.3 1745 494 368 563 475 1900 337 367 322 342 1368 8451 1690
Vehicle Class
Traffic Tallying Form
Area/Town: Kira Town Council
Location: Kira Primary School 0+010
COUNT
Project: Design of a sand seal for a low volume gravel road
Road: Kira-Kito Road
Name: IGA DAN 08/U/481
Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
17 | P a g e
4.2.2 Cumulative Equivalent Standard Axle Loads
Table 5 obtaining the Cumulative Equivalent Standard axles loads on the road
Vehicle Class Axles Load
/ kg
EALF
(Axles/8160)
Number
per day
ESAL
Pedestrians 653
Bicycles 38
Motorcycles 562
Saloon cars and taxis 1000 0.1225 154 19
Light Goods Vans:
(Pickups, 4WD)
2000 0.2451 203 50
Small Bus: Minibuses and
Matatus
3000 0.3676 31 11
Medium Bus: Coasters 4500 0.5515 5 3
Light Single Unit Trucks:
Dynas and tractors
4000 0.4902 39 19
Medium-Large Single Unit
Trucks: Lorries, fusos
7500 0.9191 5 4
Buses 10000 1.2255 0
TOTAL 107

CESAL =
ESAL 365 100
R
1 +
R
100
x+y
1 +
R
100
y

Where
A = Total ESA / day
R = Traffic growth rate which is taken as 4.5% per annum
x = design life in years taken as 5 years
y = number of years before start of design life
=
107 365 100
4.5
1 +
4.5
100
10+1
1 +
4.5
100
1

= 501,512
CESAL= 0.502 MESAs
18 | P a g e
Thence the Cumulative Equivalent Standard Axle Loads applied on the road is 0.502 Million
ESAs
4.2.3 Traffic classification:
From the TRL road note 31, the traffic class is obtained depending on the number of Equivalent
Standard Axles as can be shown in the table 6 below
Table 6 Traffic classification basing on the range of ESAs

(MoWT Road Design Manual, 2010)
The traffic classification of the road is LV6 T2 as the CESALs is 501,512 ESA
4.3 Rainfall Assessment
Annual rainfall estimates and maximum evaporation data obtained from the Meteorological
Department is indicated in appendix II and the maximum evaporation in the hottest month was
found as 180mm and the average annual rainfall over the last five years was found as 1387.4
mm.
4.3.1 Weinert Value
This value is computed from the equation below;
= 12
(MELTC, 2011)
Where E
y
is the evaporation in the hottest month of the year; in mm which
according to the Kituuza Meteorological centre data is found to be 180mm
and
P
a
is the annual precipitation; in mm which is 1387.4 mm
19 | P a g e
= 12
180
1387.4
= 1.56
Thus the Weinert number is less than 4.
4.4 Laboratory tests
The laboratory results obtained from the testing of samples obtained from the road to ascertain if
the current material is suitable for re-use or modification or has to be removed entirely from the
road and new material imported is shown in the appendix III.
Three samples were obtained and thoroughly tested for the tests indicated in the methodology
and they are all indicated in the appendix III
4.4.1 MDD results:
Chainage 0+010

Figure 3 Proctor curve for chainage 0+010
Max. Dry Density (MDD) = 1,775 Kg/m3
Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) = 13.6 %
1700
1710
1720
1730
1740
1750
1760
1770
1780
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
D
r
y

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
K
g
/
m
3
)
Moisture Content %
Proctor Curve
Series1
20 | P a g e
Chainage 0+110

Figure 4 Proctor curve for chainage 0+110
Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) = 12.1%
Chainage 0+300:
Optimum Moisture Content OMC = 12.3%
1,500
1,520
1,540
1,560
1,580
1,600
1,620
1,640
1,660
1,680
1,700
1,720
9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0
D
r
y

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
K
g
/
m
3
)
Moisture Content %
Proctor Curve
Series1
21 | P a g e

Figure 5 Proctor curve for Chainage 0+300
4.4.2 Gradation Results:
Chainage 0+010

Figure 6 Sieve analysis for chainage 0+010
1,560
1,570
1,580
1,590
1,600
1,610
1,620
1,630
1,640
1,650
1,660
1,670
9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0
A
x
i
s

T
i
t
l
e
Axis Title
Proctor Curve
Series1
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

p
a
s
s
i
n
g
Diameter of particles (mm)
Sieve analysis graph for chainage 0+010
22 | P a g e
Chainage 0+110

Figure 7 Sieve analysis results for chainage 0+110
Chainage 0+300

0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

%
Diameter of particles (mm)
Sieve Analysis graph for sample from chainage 0+110
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
P
a
s
s
i
n
g

%
Diameter (mm)
Sieve analysis graph for chainage 0+300
23 | P a g e
4.4.3 Plasticity Index results:
Chainage 0+010:

Figure 8 Plasticity Index results for chainage 0+010
RESULTS
Liquid Limit ( LL ) = 48.5%
Plastic Limit ( PL ) = 34.6%
Plasticity Index ( PI=LL-PL ) = 13.9%
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
M
o
i
s
t
u
r
e

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
Number of blows
24 | P a g e
Chainage 0+110

Figure 9 Plasticity index results for chainage 0+110
RESULTS
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
M
o
i
s
t
u
r
e

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
Number of blows
25 | P a g e
Chainage 0+300

Figure 10 Plasticity index results for chainage 0+300
RESULTS
4.5 Analysis: Layer thickness Design
Basing on the following results obtained in from the tests carried out above the base following
design parameters were obtained;
The range of the Weinert value is less than 4,
The design cumulative equivalent standard axle loads (CESALs) was obtained as 0.502
MESAs thus traffic class of LV6 T2
The subgrade CBR was obtained in the range of 15-29.

30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
M
o
i
s
t
u
r
e

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
Number of blows
26 | P a g e
CHAPTER 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMNEDATIONS
5.1 Summary
This chapter has put into consideration the tests carried out and the results obtained the with the
aid of design manuals and specifications, it has given the design suitable for this road of a sand
seal as can be shown below;
5.2 Conclusions:
5.2.1 Inventory of the existing road condition
The general condition of the road was in a very good condition thus in case of carrying out the
sand seal, there will be need of slight reshaping.
5.2.2 Traffic usage of the road:
From the traffic flow analysis the traffic class of the road obtained in the results section is T2 is
Low Volume LV6 hence LV6 T2 as the CESALs is 501,512 ESA
5.2.3 Subgrade characteristics of the existing road
The in-situ CBR values of the subgrade are generally good. If in-situ CBR values obtained from
the DCP tests exceed 10% then the road foundation should be strong enough to carry traffic load
on low volume roads. Hence the fact that the CBR values are in the range of 15-29 then subgrade
is adequate and design Subgrade strength class S5. Below is figure 11 which shows the variation
of CBR for the subgrade and base;
.
Figure 11 CBR variation with the chainage along the road
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
C
B
R

(
%
)
Chainage (m)
CBR values for DCP test
Subgrade
Base
Linear (Subgrade)
Linear (Base)
27 | P a g e
The CBR values for the base layer are of concern because, on low volume roads, the minimum
allowable soaked CBR is 40%. The results show that the in-situ CBR values obtained average
approximately 78% which is significantly higher than the minimum required soaked CBR; where
the values are very low such as at chainage 0+010 being 40 there is need for strengthening and
some modification may be necessary to improve the material characteristics.
5.2.4 The design of the appropriate sand seal
New Pavement Structure
Given the above traffic, Weinert number, subgrade and sub-base CBRs and using the design
chart in appendix III for N<4 (TRL, 2007), the desired surfacing structure is obtained using the
Design charts in Table 7 of pavement catalogue (N<4) as below:
Table 7 Proposed New Pavement Structure of the road
Position Thickness CBR
Bituminous surfacing
Base 200 65
Sub-base 120 30
Sub-grade 15-29

Figure 12 Diagramatic representation of the new pavement structure
28 | P a g e
From the laboratory tests, the material used for the construction of the Base and sub-base gives
desired properties of MDD, plasticity Index and gradation thus there is no need to import
material and in cases of shortage the borrow pits where the material was initially obtained can be
used to obtain more gravel material.
The proposed surfacing is as shown in the table 8 below:
Table 8 Proposed surfacing options
Material Surfacing Binder to be used
Quarry fines from
Kira Town Council
Sand Seal with Quarry fines Bitumen Emulsion K1-60 (80-
100 Pen Base Bitumen)
River Sand Sand Seal Bitumen Emulsion K1-60 (80-
100 Pen Base Bitumen)

New Pavement Structure
Given the above traffic, Weinert number, subgrade and sub-base CBRs and using the design
chart in appendix III for N<4 below, the desired surfacing structure is obtained using the Design
charts in Table 3.3-1 of pavement catalogue (N<4) (TRL, 2007)
Table 9 Thickness and required CBR values of the new pavement strcuture
Position Thickness CBR
Bituminous surfacing
Base 200 65
Sub-base 120 30
Sub-grade 15-29

Drainage
There is currently grass growing in most of the side drains. This will help prevent scouring from
the increased run-off that will result once the sections are surfaced. The grass should be trimmed
so that its growth is controlled. Also, on the judgment of the centre trainers, scour checks should
be constructed on certain steep sections to prevent the erosion that might arise from the increase
in run-off that will result once the sections are surfaced.
29 | P a g e
REFERENCES
Archondo-Callao, R.S. (1999). Paving of Unpaved Roads. Economically - Justified Paving Cost.
Infrastructure
BEUSCH A, HARTMANN P, PETTS R C, WINKELMANN P, (1997). Low cost road
construction in Indonesia - Labor-Based Road Projects in Manggaria District.
GIUMMARRA G (2001). Road Classifications, Geometric Designs and Maintenance Standards
for Low Volume Roads. Research Report AR354, ARRB Transport Research Ltd,
Vermont South, Victoria.
Guidelines for the Geometric Design of Very Low Volume Local Roads (ADT<400), AASHTO,
USA
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR TRANSPORT AND ROAD RESEARCH (1971) Bituminous
surface treatments for newly constructed rural roads. South African Council for Scientific
and Industrial Research, TRH 3, Pretoria, (National Institute for Road Research)
OVERBY, C. 1982. Material and Pavement Design for Sealed Low Traffic Roads in Botswana.
Norwegian Road Research Laboratory.Report no. 1042, Oslo 44 pp.
SATCC, South African Transport And Communications Commission (2003) Guideline: Low
Volume Sealed Roads. Southern African Development Community (SADC).SADC House,
Gaborone, Botswana.
TRL Overseas Road Note 31: A guide to the structural design of bitumen surfaced roads in
tropical and subtropical countries (1993)
TRL, Colin Jones (2004): Improved Measurement of Pavement Strength by Dynamic Cone
Penetrometer
TRL, PROME CONSULTANTS LTD, MELTC Development of training modules, conducting
training and establishment of demonstration sites for low-cost sealing of roads in Uganda
(May, 2010)
30 | P a g e
APPENDICES
Appendix I: DCP Test Data and Results:
DCP test Data:
Table 10 UK DCP test results for all the chainages (0+010 to 0+500)
UK DCP Test Data Sheet
Project name Design of a Sand Seal for a Low Volume gravel Road; Case study: Kira-Kito Road

Test number 1 2 3
Chainage (km) 10 110 200
Location Carriageway Shoulder Carriageway
Lane number 0 0
Offset (m) 0 0 0
Direction
Zero error (mm) 11 11 11
Test date 17/04/2012 17/04/2012 17/04/2012
Remarks Left hand side Right hand side Centreline
Layers removed 0 0 0
Surface type Unpaved Unpaved Unpaved
Surface moisture Dry Dry Dry
Surface thickness (mm)
Surface condition
Surface strength
coefficient

Base thickness (mm)
Base condition
Blows Depth (mm) Blows Depth
(mm)
Blows Depth
(mm)
31 | P a g e
0 32 0 25 0 17
1 42 2 37 1 28
2 47 2 42 1 34
2 56 2 46 2 41
2 63 3 52 2 46
3 75 3 55 3 50
3 86 5 65 5 58
3 97 5 76 5 63
3 110 5 90 5 69
3 120 5 105 5 80
3 134 5 110 5 93
3 147 5 135 5 110
3 158 5 150 5 124
3 172 5 163 3 135
3 185 5 175 3 145
3 198 5 186 3 153
3 212 5 199 3 160
3 226 5 215 3 169
3 241 5 243 3 175
3 260 2 264 3 181
3 282 2 278 3 189
2 303 2 290 3 195
2 328 2 300 3 205
2 345 2 310 3 213
2 359 2 320 3 222
2 371 3 334 3 234
2 384 3 343 3 248
2 399 3 350 3 267
2 412 3 356 2 280
2 426 3 360 2 294
32 | P a g e
2 443 3 364 2 308
2 465 5 370 2 324
1 490 5 373 2 340
1 526 5 377 2 360
1 566 7 380 1 386
1 582 7 382 1 419
1 590 10 389 1 442
2 604 10 397 1 457
2 615 10 406 1 470
2 626 10 424 1 485
2 634 10 443 1 495
2 645 10 465 1 507
2 654 10 487 1 520
2 663 10 520 1 530
2 672 5 540 1 542
2 680 5 565 1 555
2 690 3 583 1 569
2 699 2 595 1 584
2 709 2 607 1 600
2 619 1 615
3 635 1 630
3 655 1 645
2 666 1 660
2 679 1 674
2 689 1 690
2 699 1 704
2 710 1 718
2 721 1 729
2 730 1 742
2 740 1 755
33 | P a g e
2 750 1 768
2 760 1 783
2 769 1 795
2 779 1 810
UK DCP Test Data Sheet
Project name Design of a Sand Seal for a Low Volume gravel Road; Case study: Kira-Kito Road
Test number 4 5 6
Chainage (km) 300 400 500
Location Carriageway Shoulder Carriageway
Lane number 0 0
Offset (m) 0 0 0
Direction
Zero error (mm) 11 11 11
Test date (dd/mm/yyyy) 17/04/2012 17/04/2012 17/04/2012
Remarks Left hand side Right hand side Centreline
Layers removed 0 0 0
Surface type Unpaved Unpaved Unpaved
Surface moisture Very Dry Dry Moderate
Surface thickness (mm)
Surface condition
Surface strength
coefficient

Base type
Base thickness (mm)
Base condition
Blows Depth (mm) Blows Depth (mm) Blows Depth (mm)
0 15 0 11 0 22
2 26 2 20 2 36
2 34 2 26 2 45
2 42 2 34 2 55
34 | P a g e
2 51 2 40 2 61
2 58 3 45 2 69
2 67 5 51 2 75
2 72 5 55 2 84
3 80 10 68 2 92
3 89 10 81 2 102
3 96 10 101 2 111
3 105 10 127 2 120
3 113 7 150 2 130
3 121 7 166 2 140
3 130 7 186 2 147
3 140 7 217 2 156
3 150 5 242 2 165
3 158 3 259 2 175
3 167 3 280 2 185
3 176 2 295 2 194
3 186 2 308 2 205
3 197 2 324 2 214
3 211 2 343 2 225
3 223 1 352 2 237
3 245 1 373 2 253
3 260 1 384 2 265
3 272 1 395 2 279
3 286 1 406 2 295
3 302 1 419 2 309
3 319 1 430 2 324
3 337 1 440 2 340
3 358 1 440 2 355
2 375 1 450 2 373
1 402 1 460 2 390
35 | P a g e
1 445 1 470 2 405
1 465 1 480 2 423
1 480 1 490 2 438
1 495 1 500 2 454
1 509 1 510 2 470
1 523 1 520 1 475
1 538 1 530 1 482
1 550 1 541 1 488
1 564 1 554 1 495
1 576 1 569 1 502
1 590 1 580 1 510
1 603 1 594 1 515
1 615 1 608 1 523
1 627 1 620 1 523
1 639 1 633 1 530
1 652 1 647 1 537
1 665 1 662 2 552
1 675 1 675 2 568
1 689 1 690 2 581
1 702 1 703 2 600
1 715 1 715 2 618
1 725 1 725 2 635
1 725 1 739 2 654
1 740 1 750 2 670
1 755 1 762 2 689
1 769 1 774 2 707
1 785 1 785 2 729
1 800 1 796 2 729
1 815 1 809 2 751
2 774
36 | P a g e
Layer boundary graphs and CBR graphs
Chainage 0+010:

Figure 13 Layer boundaries and CBR variation for chainage 0+010
Chainage 0+110:

Figure 14 Layer boundaries and CBR variation for chainage 0+110

37 | P a g e
Chainage 0+210:

Figure 15 boundaries and CBR variation for chainage 0+210
Chainage 0+300:


38 | P a g e
Chainage 0+400:

Chain age 0+500:


39 | P a g e
Histogram to indicate the Base CBR

Figure 19 Histogram showing the base SBR (%)
40 | P a g e
Appendix II: Kituza Coffee Research Meteorological Station Data
Long Term Mean (LTM) Monthly Evaporation (mm) (PAN TYPE ....A........)
Table 11 Monthly evaporation data for Kituza coffee research station
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Mean 138 122 147 122 120 110 100 105 124 134 122 128
Highest 163 144 169 138 140 129 115 134 154 180 139 175
Lowest 87 101 124 113 107 94 76 78 95 104 111 97

Monthly Maximum Fall of Rainfall (mm)
Table 12 Monthly Maximum fall of rainfall for Kituza Station
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 24.0 17.0 29.5 31.0 30.3 45.0 16.5 26.2 55.5 54.0 37.0 30.5
2008 91.0 14.0 38.0 93.0 30.2 20.0 13.8 14.3 21.2 35.0 22.0 6.5
2009 19.0 25.0 16.0 34.0 37.0 12.0 19.0 38.0 32.5 58.0 53.2 31.5
2010 22.5 95.0 60.0 63.0 20.0 22.0 28.5 20.5 62.5 31.0 45.0 40.5
2011 15.0 16.0 35.0 30.4 25.5 7.8 18.0 54.0 29.5 30.6 58.0 68.0

Monthly Rainfall Totals (mm)
Table 13 Montly Rainfall totals of Kituza station
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 133.3 64.2 69.5 140.8 106.3 119.0 82.3 81.1 234.0 157.8 151.5 48.0
2008 154.4 47.2 191.9 348.2 103.3 33.3 39.1 43.7 83.4 184.8 82.4 17.3
2009 34.1 73.8 26.0 204.8 157.0 35.0 34.1 124.8 96.8 232.1 232.4 126.2
2010 51.5 273.3 258.5 191.1 104.5 70.8 47.8 48.4 118.1 110.2 111.2 110.2
2011 22.2 24.2 161.9 137.7 90.1 14.8 21.7 135.7 142.8 102.8 289.3 204.3

41 | P a g e
Appendix III Laboratory tests data:
Table 14 Test results from Maximum Dry Density of the soil for chainage 0+010\
DESIGN OF A SAND SEAL FOR A LOW VOLUME GRAVEL ROAD
Project Road: Kira-Kito Road
DATA SHEET FOR MOISTURE - DENSITY RELATIONS OF SOILS
USING 4.54 KG. RAMMER ( OMC & MDD TEST ) As per BS 1377:Part 4
Sample No: 1 Sampling Date: 17 -04-12
Source/Location of Sample: Kira Kito Testing Date: 25 -04-12
Km 0+100 LHS
Sample Description : Red Gravel Material Technician: Iga Dan
Proposed Use: Wearing C
Mass of mould (g): 5,120 Volume (cm
3
): 2,299
Specimen Number/Mould No. 1 2 3 4 5
Mass of mould+base+compacted specimen ( m2

) 9,480 9,640 9,758 9,730 9,680
Mass of mould + base (m1) 5,120 5,120 5,120 5,120 5,120
Mass of compacted specimen(m2-m1) 4,360 4,520 4,638 4,610 4,560
Bulk Density = (m2-m1) x mould factor 1.896 1.966 2.017 2.005 1.983
Moisture content container No
Weight of wet soil + container m1 153.40 154.10 206.00 166.33 132.15 147.11 190.80 128.96 190.42 129.98
42 | P a g e
Weight of dry soil + container m2 143.81 142.24 187.23 150.97 119.96 133.11 169.90 117.00 169.90 117.00
Mass of container m3 30.39 30.99 31.42 30.71 30.74 30.71 30.56 29.00 30.56 29.00
Weight of water (m1-m2) 9.6 11.9 18.8 15.4 12.2 14.0 20.9 12.0 20.5 13.0
Weight of dry sample (m2-m3) 113.4 111.3 155.8 120.3 89.2 102.4 139.3 88.0 139.3 88.0
8.5 10.7 12.0 12.8 13.7 13.7 15.0 13.6 14.7 14.8
Moisture content w (m1-m2)/(m2-m3) x 100 9.6 12.4 13.7 14.3 14.7
Dry density = (100x bulk density)/(100+w) kg/m3 1,731 1,749 1,775 1,754 1,729

43 | P a g e
Table 15 Test results for Particle size analysis test (BS 1377: Part 2) for chainage 0+010
PROJECT: Kira-Kito Road
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS (BS 1377:Part 2)
Sample reference :1 Sampling Date: 17
-04-
12
Location Kira Kito Testing Date: 25
-04-
12
Km 0+100 LHS
Sample Description Red Gravel Material
Initial wt before washing : Moisture Content :
Dry wt after washing : Initial Dry Weight 1300
Grading Modulus = 2.02
Diameter Partial Cumulative Cumulative % Passing Grading Limits
Retained Retained Retained
(mm) Mass(g) Mass (g) (%) (%) (%)
50.000 0.00 0.0 0.0 100.0
37.500 0.00 0.0 0.0 100.0
20.000 96.98 97.0 7.5 92.5
10.000 24.85 121.8 9.4 90.6
5.000 59.10 180.9 13.9 86.1
2.360 247.12 428.1 32.9 67.1
1.180 227.07 655.1 50.4 49.6
0.500 286.22 941.3 72.4 27.6
0.425 49.91 991.3 76.3 23.8
0.300 92.04 1083.3 83.3 16.7
0.150 104.59 1187.9 91.4 8.6
0.075 14.82 1202.7 92.5 7.5
Pan 2.49
44 | P a g e
Table 16 Test results for the Moisture-Density Relatios of the soil (BS 1377: Part 4) for chainage 0+210
USING 4.54 KG. RAMMER ( OMC & MDD TEST ) As per BS 1377: Part4

Sample No:

Sampling Date: 17 -04-12
Source/Location of Sample:
Kira Kito
Km 0+200 LHS
Testing Date: 25 -04-12
Sample Description : Red Gravel Material
Proposed Use: W.C
Mass of mould (g): 5,120 Volume (cm
3
): 2,299
Specimen Number/Mould No. 1 2 3 4 5

) 8,950 9,235 9,500 9,404 9,350
Moisture content container No
45 | P a g e
Weight of wet soil + container m1 103.27 115.98 149.51 144.15 134.14 151.57 168.74 128.96 208.60 129.98
Weight of dry soil + container m2 97.02 108.45 138.21 133.46 123.08 138.42 153.22 117.00 186.14 117.00
Weight of dry sample (m2-m3) 66.6 77.5 106.8 102.8 92.6 107.9 122.7 88.0 155.6 88.0
9.4 9.7 10.6 10.4 11.9 12.2 12.7 13.6 14.4 14.8
Dry density =(100x bulk density)/(100+w) Kg/m3 1,521 1,620 1,700 1,647 1,606
46 | P a g e
Sampling Date: 17
-04-
12
-04-
12
Km 0+200 LHS
0 Technician:
Iga
Dan


(mm) Mass(g) Mass (g) (%) (%) (%)
50.000 0.00 0.0 0.0 100.0
37.500 0.00 0.0 0.0 100.0
20.000 40.90 40.9 3.4 96.6
10.000 28.71 69.6 5.8 94.2
5.000 31.80 101.4 8.5 91.5
2.360 41.32 142.7 11.9 88.1
1.180 90.53 233.3 19.4 80.6
0.500 327.50 560.8 46.7 53.3
0.425 119.43 680.2 56.7 43.3
0.300 161.70 841.9 70.2 29.8
0.150 195.79 1037.7 86.5 13.5
0.075 28.77 1066.5 88.9 11.1
Pan 2.86

47 | P a g e
Table 18 Test results for the Moisture-Density Relatios of the soil (BS 1377: Part 4) for chainage 0+300
USING 4.54
KG. RAMMER ( OMC & MDD
TEST )

As per BS 1377: Part4
Sample No: Sampling Date: 17 -04-12
Source/Location of Sample: Kira Kito Testing Date: 25 -04-12
Km 0+300 LHS
Sample Description : Red Gravel Material Technician:
Iga
Dan
Proposed Use: Wearing Course

Mass of mould
(g): 5,120
Volume
(cm
3
): 2,299
Specimen Number/Mould
No. 1 2 3 4 5

) 9,030 9,190 9,380 9,400 9,370
Weight of wet soil +
container m1 140.32
115.9
8
208.6
0
129.9
8 161.75 153.30
138.7
4
128.9
6 149.51
144.1
5
Weight of dry soil + container
m2 132.02
109.7
5
192.0
1
120.4
5 147.61 140.49
126.5
2
117.0
0 134.91
129.4
6
Weight of dry sample (m2-
m3) 101.6 78.8 160.6 89.7 116.7 110.0 96.0 90.0 101.4 100.5
8.2 7.9 10.3 10.6 12.1 11.6 12.7 13.3 14.4 14.6
Dry density = (100x bulk density)/(100+w) kg/m3 1,574 1,602 1,656 1,647 1,614
48 | P a g e
Sampling Date: 17
-04-
12
-04-
12
Km 0+300 LHS
#REF! Technician:
Iga
Dan


(mm) Mass(g) Mass (g) (%) (%) (%)
50.000 0.00 0.0 0.0 100.0
37.500 50.60 0.0 0.0 100.0
20.000 279.80 50.6 2.8 97.2
10.000 261.28 330.4 18.4 81.6
5.000 237.76 591.7 32.9 67.1
2.360 129.85 829.4 46.1 53.9
1.180 79.85 959.3 53.3 46.7
0.500 212.30 1039.1 57.7 42.3
0.425 80.00 1251.4 69.5 30.5
0.300 79.83 1331.4 74.0 26.0
0.150 71.25 1411.3 78.4 21.6
0.075 10.62 1482.5 82.4 17.6
Pan 1.52
49 | P a g e
Appendix IV: Design Charts

50 | P a g e

51 | P a g e

52 | P a g e

53 | P a g e

54 | P a g e
55 | P a g e
Appendix IV: Photographs of the project execution

Figure 20Assembling of the DCP test equipment

Figure 21 Applying blows to the soil to get penetrations

Figure 22 Recording of pentrations

Figure 23 Measuring of the distances from one chainage
to another

Figure 24 The Kira-Kito road condition

56 | P a g e

Figure 25 Ruler used to measure the penetration

Figure 26 Sampling to obtain samples for laboratory
tests

Final Year Project, Iga Dan

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

Final Year Project, Iga Dan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FINAL YEAR PROJECT:

DESIGN OF A SAND SEAL FOR A LOW VOLUME GRAVEL

You might also like