Pavement Design

Guest Lecturer
Dr. Sirous Alavi, P.E.
SIERRA TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, INC.
1005 Terminal Way, Suite 125
Reno, Nevada 89502

Topics

Introduction
Design Factors
Pavement Types

Fundamentals of Pavement Design

AASHTO
Asphalt Institute

FUNDEMENTALS

Types of Design

State-of-Practice State-of-the-Art

Empirical

MechanisticMechanistic
Empirical

FUNDEMENTALS

Mechanistic-Empirical
(M-E) Design

Primary advantage is the consideration of

the state of stress

HMA
Base
Subbase
Subgrade Soil

FUNDEMENTALS

Mechanistic-Empirical
(M-E) Design

Establishes connection between distress

and distress mechanism

FUNDEMENTALS

Mechanistic-Empirical
(M-E) Design
Accounts for new materials, traffic loads,
and construction procedures
All design features affecting pavement
performance considered
Relies more on fundamental engineering
mechanics
Primary focus on pavement performance

FUNDEMENTALS

Mechanistic-Empirical
(M-E) Design

1993 AASHTO Guide

Design Variables

Time
Traffic
Reliability
Environment
Serviceability
Structural Number

FUNDEMENTALS

Mechanistic-Empirical
(M-E) Design

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design
Time

Constraints

Performance Period
Refers

to the time that an initial pavement

structure will last before rehab

Analysis Period
Refers

to the period of time that any

design strategy must cover

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design

Traffic
Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL)
Converts

wheel loads of various

magnitudes and repetitions to an
equivalent number of "standard" or
"equivalent" loads based on the amount
of damage they do to the pavement

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design

Equivalent Axle Load Factor (EALF)

Damage per pass to a pavement by the axle
in question relative to the damage per pass
of a standard axle load
Depends of type of pavements, thickness or
structural capacity and terminal conditions

FUNDEMENTALS

EALF Table for Flexible Pavement,

Single Axle & pt of 2.5
Pavement Structural Number (SN)
Axle
Load
(kips)
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16

0.004
0.003
0.011
0.032
0.078
0.168
0.328
0.591

0.004
0.004
0.017
0.047
0.102
0.198
0.358
0.613

0.003
0.004
0.017
0.051
0.118
0.229
0.399
0.646

0.002
0.003
0.013
0.041
0.102
0.213
0.388
0.645

0.002
0.002
0.010
0.034
0.088
0.189
0.360
0.623

0.002
0.002
0.009
0.031
0.080
0.176
0.342
0.606

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design

i =1

ESAL = Fi ni

m = number of axle
load groups
Fi = the EALF for the
ith axle load group
ni = number of
passes of the ith axle
load group

FUNDEMENTALS

200X AASHTO Design Guide

No more ESALs
Traffic input
Vehicle type (number of axles)
Axle weight
Quantity and quality of raw traffic data
similar to that used to compute ESALS
Consistent with FHWA Traffic Monitoring
Guide

FUNDEMENTALS

Traffic Hierarchical Input Levels

Input
Level

Input Values

Knowledge of
Parameters

Site specific WIM & AVC

Good

2
3

Regional Default WIM &

AVC, Vehicle Counts
National Default WIM &
AVC, Vehicle Counts

Modest
Poor

200X AASHTO Design Guide

Load Spectra
Axle weight frequencies for each
common axle combination (e.g.
single axle, tandem axle, tridem
axle, quad axle).

800

700

600

Number of Axles

FUNDEMENTALS

500

400
300

200

100

0
0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

55000

60000

65000

70000

75000

80000

Axle Load (lbs)

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design

Reliability - Incorporating some degree of certainty

into the design process to ensure that various design
alternatives will last the Analysis Period
Recommended Level of Reliability
Functional
Classificaiton

Urban

Rural

Interstate
Arterials
Collectors
Local

85 - 99.9
80 - 99
80 - 95
50 - 80

80 - 99.9
75 - 95
75 - 95
50 - 80

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design
Environmental

Temperature
Stresses

induced by thermal action

Changes in creep properties
Effect of freezing and thawing of subgrade

Rainfall
Penetration

of surface water into underlying

materials

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design
Serviceability

Initial serviceability index is function of

pavement type and construction quality
Terminal serviceability index is lowest
index that will be tolerated before
rehab, resurfacing, or reconstruction

SURFACE (AC)

AASHTO Design

BASE

FUNDEMENTALS

SUBBASE (OPTIONAL)

Structural Number

SUBGRADE

mi = drainage coefficient for layer i

a1, a2, a3 = layer coefficient representative of
surface, base, and subbase course, respectively
D1, D2, D3 = thickness representative of surface,
base, and subbase course, respectively

SN = a1D1 + a2 D2 m2 + a3 D3 m3

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design Example

Ridgeview

Dr. Rehabilitation

20-year flexible pavement analysis

period
Low volume road with limited growth
potential

NAM
ED

M
PLU

VIEW

COPPER
POINT

R IDGE

AS

FUNDEMENTALS

C OPP

ER PO
INT

COPPER POINT

GREEN RANCH

V
GE
IE
W

D
ME
TA

ADO W HEIG

IN VIS

WINDY M

MOU
N TA

NS
CR
EE

HTS

GREEN RA
NCH

RID

NA
UN

RIDGEVIEW

UM
PL

W
VIE
GE

AS

RID
COPPER

Traffic

72-hour vehicle counts were conducted

directionally at three locations within the
project boundaries using machine traffic
counters
Manual classification counts were conducted
at the machine count locations to calibrate
the machine count data and categorize into
the FHWA 13 vehicle classification scheme

Vehicle Classification

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design Example

Adjusted Traffic Volumes and Vehicle Classification Year 2005 Through 2010
Road Segment:

Ridgeview Drive @ Plumas Street

Class 1

EB

Class 2

%
Volume

WB

Volume

Class 3

Class 4

Class 5

Class 6
0.15

Class 9

Total

43.64

54.11

0.35

1.60

0.15

100

1132.30

1404.00

9.10

41.60

3.90

3.90

2594.8

43.29

54.11

0.70

1.60

0.15

0.15

100

1123.20

1404.00

18.20

41.60

3.90

3.90

2594.8

5189.6
Road Segment:

Class 1

FUNDEMENTALS

Total ADT

Ridgeview Drive @ Mountain Vista Way

EB

Class 2

43.44

Volume
WB

Class 3

823.65

54.11
1026.00

Class 4

Class 5

0.45

1.60

8.55

30.40

Class 6
0.20

Class 9

Total

0.20

100

3.80

3.80

42.94

54.11

0.95

1.60

0.20

0.20

100

Volume

814.15

1026.00

18.05

30.40

3.80

3.80

1896.2

1896.2

3792.4

Total ADT

Adjusted Traffic Volumes and Vehicle Classification Year 2011 Through 2025
Road Segment:

Ridgeview Drive @ Plumas Street

Class 1

EB

%
Volume

WB

%
Volume

Class 2

Class 3

Class 4

Class 5

43.94

54.11

0.35

1.60

1140.10

1404.00

9.10

41.60

43.59

54.11

0.70

1.60

1131.00

1404.00

18.20

41.60

Class 6

Class 9

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Total
100
2594.8
100
2594.8
5189.6

Road Segment:

Total ADT

Ridgeview Drive @ Mountain Vista Way

Class 1

EB
WB

Class 2

Class 3

Class 4

Class 5

43.84

54.11

0.45

1.60

Volume

831.25

1026.00

8.55

30.40

43.34

54.11

0.95

1.60

Volume

821.75

1026.00

18.05

30.40

Class 6

Class 9

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Total
100
1896.2
100
1896.2
3792.4

Total ADT

AASHTO Design Example

FUNDEMENTALS

Compute ESALs using EALFs from

AASHTO Tables in Appendix D
Assumptions

Typical axle weights for each vehicle class

SN of 3.0
pt of 2.5

WB Daily ESALs

2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

WB Yearly ESALs

Cumulative ESALs

Plumas

Mountain Vista

Plumas

Mountain Vista

Plumas

Mountain Vista

90
90
90
90
90
90
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75

81
81
81
81
81
81
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66

33,031
33,031
33,031
33,031
33,031
33,031
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362
27,362

29,487
29,487
29,487
29,487
29,487
29,487
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963
23,963

33,031
66,062
99,093
132,124
165,155
198,187
225,548
252,910
280,271
307,633
334,994
362,356
389,717
417,079
444,441
471,802
499,164
526,525
553,887
581,248
608,610

29,487
58,973
88,460
117,947
147,433
176,920
200,882
224,845
248,807
272,770
296,732
320,695
344,657
368,620
392,582
416,545
440,507
464,470
488,432
512,395
536,357

FUNDEMENTALS

AASHTO Design Example

Materials
R-value data was collected at five sample
locations (8, 7, 10, 20, 8)
Resilient Modulus (MR) relationship

R-value 20 MR = 1000 + 555 x R-value (psi)

Parameter
Design Life, years
Traffic (ESALs), W18
Reliability, R (%)

Average
20
610,000
80%

Standard Deviation (New Construction), So

0.45

Subgrade R-value

10.60

Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (ksi)

6.9

Initial Serviceability, P0

4.2

Terminal Serviceability, Pt

2.5

Modulus of Elasticity for New AC (ksi)

350

Layer Coefficient for New Plant Mix Surface (AC), a1

0.39

Layer Coefficient for Gravel Base, a2

0.14

Layer Coefficient for Subbase (Borrow), a3

0.08

Drainage Coefficient for AC layer, m1

1.0

Drainage Coefficient for Base layer, m2

1.1

Drainage Coefficient for SB layer, m3

1.1

SN 3.1

10

AASHTO Design

SURFACE (AC)
BASE

FUNDEMENTALS

SUBGRADE

Assume D values for surface and base

Asphalt is 4 inches
Base is 10 inches

Calculate SN - Is it acceptable?

SN = a1D1 + a2 D2 m2
SN = 0.39 4.0 in + 0.14 10 in 1.1
SN = 3.1

Topics

Introduction
Design Factors
Pavement Types

Fundamentals of Pavement Design

AASHTO
Asphalt Institute

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design

Determine minimum thickness of asphalt

layer that will adequately withstand the
stresses that develop for two strain
criteria
Vertical compressive strain at surface of
subgrade
Horizontal tensile strain at bottom of asphalt
layer

11

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design
FUNDEMENTALS

Wheel
load

P0
P1

P1
SUBGRADE

Stress distribution
within different
layers of the
pavement structure

General form of
stress reduction

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design
FUNDEMENTALS

Wheel
load

SUBGRADE

Tension
Compression

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design

20%
Fatigue

Design Criteria
Fatigue
Nf

= allowable number of load repetitions

= dynamic modulus
t = horizontal tensile strain at the bottom of the
asphalt layer
Assumes asphalt volume of 11% and air void
volume of 5%
|E*|

Nf = 0.0796(t)-3.291 |E*|-0.854

12

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design

0.5
inch

Design Criteria
Permanent Deformation
Nd

= allowable number of load repetitions

= vertical compressive strain on the surface
of the subgrade

Nd = 1.365 x 10-9 (c)-4.477

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design

Five main steps

1.
2.
3.
4.

Select or determine input data

Select surface and base materials
Determine minimum thickness required
Evaluate feasibility of staged construction
and prepare plan, if necessary
5. Carry out economic analyses

NAM
ED

M
PLU

VIEW

COPPER
POINT

R IDGE

AS

C OPP

ER PO
INT

IE
W

TA

ADO W HEIG

IN VIS

WINDY M

MOU
N TA

NS
CR
EE

HTS

GREEN RA
NCH

V
GE

D
ME

RIDGEVIEW

COPPER POINT

GREEN RANCH

RID

NA
UN

FUNDEMENTALS

UM
PL

W
VIE
GE

AS

RID
COPPER

13

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI) Design

Example
Gross

Select or
determine input
data
Traffic
Characteristics
ESALs similar to
AASHTO

WB Daily ESALs

2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Axle
Load
(kips)
1
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16

WB Yearly ESALs

Single Tandem Tridem

Axles
Axles
Axles
0.00002
0.00018
0.00209 0.0003
0.01043 0.001 0.00030
0.0343 0.003
0.001
0.0877 0.007
0.002
0.189
0.014
0.003
0.360
0.027
0.006
0.623
0.047
0.011

Cumulative ESALs

Plumas 2

Plumas 2

Plumas 2

118
118
118
118
118
118
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72

43,110
43,110
43,110
43,110
43,110
43,110
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197
26,197

43,110
86,221
129,331
172,441
215,552
258,662
284,859
311,057
337,254
363,451
389,649
415,846
442,043
468,241
494,438
520,635
546,833
573,030
599,227
625,425
651,622

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design Example
Select

or determine input data

R-value data was collected at five sample

locations (8, 7, 10, 20, 8)
Resilient Modulus (MR) relationship
MR = 1155 + 555 x R-value (psi)

14

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design Example
Select

surface and base materials

Asphalt concrete surface or emulsified

asphalt surface
Asphalt concrete base, emulsified
asphalt base, or untreated aggregate
base

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design Example

Determine minimum thickness required

Obtained by computer program
Entering the appropriate table or chart
Assume

10 inch untreated aggregate base

MR of 7 psi
Design ESAL of 655,000
Subgrade

6.5 inch

15

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design Example
Evaluate

feasibility of staged
construction and prepare plan, if
necessary
Used when adequate funds are not
available to construct the pavement to
the required depth

FUNDEMENTALS

Asphalt Institute (AI)

Design Example
Carry

out economic analyses

Evaluate alternative designs based on

the type of pavement, type of materials
used, whether or not staged
construction is used, etc.

FUNDEMENTALS

Questions

16