Concrete Pavement Design Details

and Construction Practices

Companion Workbook
1986/1993 AASHTO Guide Procedure
1998 AASHTO Supplement Procedure

Prepared for

Federal Highway Administration, Pavements Division

400 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC 20590

and

National Highway Institute

4600 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 700, Arlington, VA 22203

Prepared by

Kathleen T. Hall
73 Bedford Road, Mundelein, IL 60060

and

Kurt D. Smith, Applied Pavement Technology, Inc.

3001 Research Road, Suite C, Champaign, IL 61822

If you have comments or questions about this workbook, please contact:

Katie Hall
kthall@wwa.com
847-549-8410

or

Kurt Smith
kurtsmith@aol.com
217-398-3977

Contents of this Workbook

Worksheet

Description

cover

cover page and table of contents

roadmap

roadmap to worksheets in this companion workbook

k correlation

k value correlations to soil type and properties

k backcalc

k value backcalculation equations

98 k steps

description of steps in determining design k value for 1998 AASHTO method

98 fill-rigid

adjustment to k value for embankment and/or shallow rigid layer for 1998 AASHTO method

98 seasonal k

calculation of seasonally adjusted design k value for 1998 AASHTO method

98 AASHTO

concrete slab thickness design by 1998 AASHTO method

98 fault chk

faulting check for undoweled and doweled pavements for 1998 AASHTO method

climate

climatic data for major US cities

86 seasonal k

calculation of seasonally adjusted design k value for 1986/1993 AASHTO method

86 AASHTO

concrete slab thickness design by 1986/1993 AASHTO method

cover

Roadmap for this Companion Workbook

Design by 1986/1993
AASHTO Guide Method

Design by 1998 AASHTO

Supplement Method

98 k steps

98 fill-rigid

k correlation
86 seasonal k

98 seasonal k
k backcalc

86 AASHTO

98 AASHTO
climate
98 fault chk

roadmap

Correlations Between K Value, Soil Type, Soil Properties, and Degree of Saturation

AASHTO
Class

Description

A-2-5, gravelly
A-2-4, sandy

silty sand

A-2-5, sandy

silty gravelly sand

A-2-6, gravelly

clayey gravel

A-2-7, gravelly

clayey sandy gravel

A-2-6, sandy

clayey sand

A-2-7, sandy

clayey gravelly sand

80
60
40
25

300
300
200
150

450
400
400
300

300 500

SM

120 135

20 40

300 400

GC

120 140

20 40

200 450

SC

105 130

10 20

150 350

Fine-Grained Soils (See Note):

90 105
ML, OL
silt/sand/gravel mix
100 125
silt

48

25 165

5 15

40 220

poorly graded silt

MH

80 - 100

48

25 190

A-6

plastic clay

CL

100 125

5 15

25 255

CL, OL

90 125

4 15

25 215

CH, OH

80 110

35

40 - 220

moderately plastic
elastic clay
highly plastic

A-7-6

Subgrade k v alue (psi/in)

60
35
20
15

k value
(psi/in)

A-5

A-7-5

200

CBR
(percent)

A-2 Soils (Granular Materials with High Fines):

silty gravel
GM
130 145
40 80
silty sandy gravel

A-2-4, gravelly

250

Dry Density
(lb/cu ft)

Coarse-Grained Soils
125 140
gravel
GW, GP
120 130
coarse sand
SW
110 130
fine sand
SP
105 120

A-1-a, well graded

A-1-a, poorly graded
A-1-b
A-3

A-4

Unified
Class

elastic clay

The recommended k value ranges apply to a homogeneous layer at least 10 ft thick. If an embankment layer less than 10 ft thick exists over a
softer subgrade, the k value of the underlying soil should be estimated from A-6
the above table and adjusted for the type and thickness of
embankment material (see fill-rigid worksheet). The k value should also be adjusted if a stiff layer (e.g., bedrock) exists within 10 ft of the top
A-7-6
of the soil (see fill-rigid worksheet).

A-7-5

The k value of fine-grained soil is highly dependent on the degree of saturation. See chart below.

A-5
A-4

150

100

50

50

60

70

80

90

Degree of saturation (percent)

k correlation

100

Backcalculation of k Value from Deflections

Equations are provided below for backcalulating the dynamic k value, including correction for finite slab size,
from deflections measured with a falling weight deflectometer or similar device, using the SHRP sensor configuration.
In the calculations below, the backcalculated dynamic k value is divided by 2 to obtain an estimated static k value
for use in the AASHTO design procedures.
For the purpose of backcalculating k value, it is not necessary to normalize the deflections to a particular load level,
nor is it necessary to know the layer thicknesses, nor to make any adjustments to the deflections for temperature.
However, deflections measured when the slab is curled out of contact with the base or foundation
should not be used to backcalculate k values without adjustment.
Enter the slab length (joint spacing) and slab width in feet below for use in the slab size correction.

Slab length
Slab width

15
12

ft
ft

Calculated L

13.42

ft

Bare Concrete Pavement

station

k static
psi/in

load P
pounds

d0
mils

d8
mils

d12
mils

d18
mils

d24
mils

d36
mils

d60
mils

AREA7
in

l init
in

d0*

k init
psi/in

AF d0

AF l

k adj
psi/in

k static
psi/in

106

8990

4.18

3.98

3.84

3.61

3.36

2.88

2.05

45.0

40.71

0.1237

160

0.868

0.934

212

106

Composite Pavement
station

k static
psi/in

load P
pounds

d12
mils

d18
mils

d24
mils

d36
mils

d60
mils

AREA5
in

l init
in

d12*

k init
psi/in

AF d0

AF l

k adj
psi/in

k static
psi/in

98

9025

3.49

3.32

3.13

2.73

2.02

37.8

48.83

0.1189

129

0.823

0.896

195

98

k backcalc

Steps in Determining k Value for Use in 1998 AASHTO Supplement Procedure

Correlation method
Estimate k for one or more seasons from
correlations with soil type, density, CBR, and
degree of saturation.

Backcalculation method
or

See k correlation worksheet.

Backcalculate dynamic k from deflections

measured on in-service pavement. Divide the
mean backcalculated k by 2 to estimate the
static k.
See k backcalc worksheet.

Fill/rigid layer adjustments

for correlation method
Correlations of k to soil type and properties
apply to a homogeneous soil layer at least 10 ft
[3 m] thick. If an embankment layer less than
10 ft [3 m] thick exists or will be placed over a
softer soil, the k value of the underlying soil
should be estimated from the available
correlations and adjusted for the type and
thickness of embankment.
If a stiff layer (e.g., bedrock) exists within 10 ft
[3 m] of the top of the soil, the k value should
be adjusted.
See 98 fill-rigid worksheet.

Fill/rigid layer adjustments

for backcalculation method
No fill or rigid layer adjustments are needed if
the type and depth of fill and the depth to a
rigid layer are the same for the pavement
being designed and the pavement on which
the deflections were measured.
A fill adjustment and/or a rigid layer adjustment
is needed if the fill and rigid layer
characteristics of the pavement being designed
differ from those of the pavement tested.
See 98 fill-rigid worksheet.

Plate load test method

or

Measure k according to AASHTO T221 or T222,

using a 30-in-diameter plate. In the repetitive
test (T221), k is the ratio of load to elastic
(recoverable) deformation. In the nonrepetitive
test (T222) k is the load-deformation ratio at a
deformation of 0.05 in.

Fill/rigid layer adjustments

for plate load testing method
AASHTO T 221 and T 222 specify that if the
pavement is to be built on an embankment, the
plate bearing tests should be conducted on a
test embankment.
If the testing is not conducted on a test
embankment equal in material and thickness to
the embankment which wll be constructed, a fill
adjustment is needed. See 98 fill-rigid
worksheet.
The effect of a rigid layer is reflected in the plate
load test results; no adjustment is needed.

Assign k to seasons of the year

Among the factors which should be considered in assigning seasonal k values are the seasonal movement of the
water table, seasonal precipitation levels, winter frost depths, number of freeze-thaw cycles, and the extent of
frost protection provided by embankment material.
A ''frozen" k may not be appropriate for winter, even in a cold climate, if the frost will not remain in a significant
thickness (a few feet) of the subgrade throughout the winter. A k value of 500 psi/in is reasonable for a subgrade
frozen to a significant depth.
The seasonal variation in degree of saturation is difficult to predict, but in locations where a water table is
constantly present at a depth of less than about 10 ft, it is reasonable to expect that fine-grained subgrades will
remain at least 70 to 90 percent saturation, and may be completely saturated for substantial periods in the
spring. The highest position of the water table, but not its annual variation, can be determined from county soil
reports.
See 98 seasonal k worksheet.

Calculate seasonally adjusted k value for use in design

The seasonally adjusted design k value is a damage-weighted average k which yields the same predicted
performance over the course of a year as the k values assigned to the different seasons.
See 98 seasonal k worksheet.

98 k steps

Density of fill (lb/cu ft)

Thickness of fill (ft)

12

90 100 110 120

130

140

150

10
8
6
4
2
psi/in

600

400

200

200

600

400

psi/in

Adjusted k value
200

Enter with k for

natural subgrade

< 10 ft
Depth to
rigid layer

400

> 10 ft
psi/in

98 fill-rigid

1 ft = 0.305 m,
1 psi/in = 0.27 kPa/mm,
1 lb/cu ft = 159 N/cu m

Seasonally Adjusted Design K Value for 1998 AASHTO Supplement Procedure

Enter the number of months for each season, so that total number of months is twelve.
Enter a k value for each season.
Press the "solve for seasonally adjusted k value" button.
Use this seasonally adjusted design k value in the 98 AASHTO thickness design worksheet.

Season
spring
summer
fall
winter

Months

k value
W'
(psi/in)
(millions)
3
50
6.90
3
125
4.81
3
125
4.81
3
250
3.33
Weighted Mean Relative Damage
Weighted Mean W' (millions)
Seasonally adjusted effective k value (psi/in)

log Relative
Damage
0.1450
0.2078
0.2078
0.3000
0.2151
4.648
135

For the purpose of calculating the seasonally adjusted design k value, a trial slab thickness is calculated using
the inputs from the 98 AASHTO worksheet and the arithmetic average of the seasonal k values above.

parameter
slab thickness
arithmetic average k value

symbol

value

units

D
kave

11.80
138

in
psi/in

The values for the following parameters are taken from the 98 AASHTO worksheet.
W18

estimated future ESALs

design reliability
overall standard deviation
mean 28-day concrete elastic modulus
mean 28-day concrete flexural strength
concrete Poisson's ratio
base elastic modulus
base thickness
slab/base friction coefficient
design k value
initial serviceability
terminal serviceability
joint spacing
edge support adjustment factor
mean annual temperature
mean annual precipitation
mean annual wind speed

R
So
Ec
S'c

Eb
Hb
f
k
P1
P2
E
temp
precip
wind

49,988,514
90
0.35
4,200,000
600
0.15
25,000
12
1.5
135
4.3
2.5
20
1.00
67.5
55.8
7.7

%
psi
psi
psi
in
psi/in

ft
deg F
in
mph

Values for the following parameters are calculated from the trial thickness and above inputs.

standard normal deviate

effective positive temperature differential
slab length in inches
ratio of stress with friction to stress with bond
radius of relative stiffness
log of slope of TD effect on stress
stress due to load
total stress due to load and temperature

ZR
TD
L
F
l
log b
sigma l
sigma t

-1.282
11.12
240
1.04
45.73
-1.254
123.70
208.96

deg F
in
in
psi
psi

Values for the following parameters are calculated for the trial thickness and AASHO Road Test constants.
effective positive temperature differential
ratio of stress with friction to stress with bond
radius of relative stiffness
log of slope of TD effect on stress
stress due to load
total stress due to load and temperature

TD
F
l
log b
sigma l
sigma t

9.37
1.04
48.31
-1.428
132.79
187.04

deg F
in
psi
psi

Values for the following parameters are calculated to determine the trial thickness for the design ESALs.
allowable log ESALs for 50% reliability, new design
allowable log W for 50% reliability, AASHO Road Test
log rho term
serviceability loss term
beta term
allowable ESALs for design reliability, new design
expected ESALs for design reliability, new design
ratio of expected to allowable ESALs

log W'
log W
log R
G
B
W'
W18R

7.37
7.89
8.08
-0.19
1.01
8,357,394
49,988,514
5.98

Values for the following parameters are calculated during the seasonally adjusted effective k value calculation.
allowable ESALs for design reliability, new design
weighted mean W'
ratio weighted mean W' to allowable ESALs
98 seasonal k

8.36 millions
4.65 millions
0.556

G16:

This value will be updated amd copied to the 98 AASHTO worksheet whenever you click the recalculate seasonally adjusted effective k value button on that worksheet.

G38:

Fine-grained soils
Sand
Aggregate
Lime-stabilized clay
Asphalt-treated base
Cement-treated base
Lean concrete base

G40:

Fine-grained soil
0.5 to 2.0
Sand
0.5 to 1.0
Aggregate
0.7 to 2.0
Polyethlyene
0.5 to 1.0
Lime-stabilized clay
3.0 to 5.3
Cement-treated base
8 to 63
Asphalt-treated base
3.7 to 10
Lean concrete base
without curing compound
> 36
with curing compound
3.5 to 4.5

G45:

1.00 for 12-ft lane and AC shoulder

0.94 for 12-ft lane and tied PCC shoulder
0.92 for widened PCC slab

3,000 to 40,000 psi

10,000 to 25,000 psi
15,000 to 45,000 psi
20,000 to 70,000 psi
300,000 to 600,000 psi
1000 * (500 + compressive strength, psi)
1000 * (500 + compressive strength, psi)

Comments

1998 AASHTO Supplement Procedure for Concrete Pavement Thickness Design

Whenever you change input values below, first click the button "recalculate seasonally adjusted effective k value"
before solving for the required slab thickness or allowable ESALs.

Enter values for the following parameters in the 1998 AASHTO concrete pavement performance model.
parameter

symbol

slab thickness
estimated future ESALs
design reliability
overall standard deviation
mean 28-day concrete elastic modulus
mean 28-day concrete flexural strength
concrete Poisson's ratio
base elastic modulus
base thickness
slab/base friction coefficient
k value
initial serviceability
terminal serviceability
joint spacing
edge support adjustment factor
mean annual temperature
mean annual precipitation
mean annual wind speed

D
W18
R
So
Ec
S'c

Eb
Hb
f
k
P1
P2
L
E
temp
precip
wind

value units
15.37
49,988,514
90
0.35
4,200,000
600
0.15
25,000
12
1.5
135
4.3
2.5
20
1.00
67.5
55.8
7.7

in
ESALs
%
psi
psi
psi
in
psi/in

ft
deg F
in
mph

Values for the following parameters are calculated from the above inputs.

ZR

standard normal deviate

effective positive temperature differential
slab length in inches
ratio of stress with friction to stress with bond
radius of relative stiffness
log of slope of TD effect on stress
stress due to load
total stress due to load and temperature

TD
L
F
l
log b
sigma l
sigma t

-1.282
12.15 deg F
240
in
1.00
55.74
in
-1.273
82.21 psi
135.21
psi

ok
ok
ok
ok
ok
ok
ok
ok

Values for the following parameters are calculated for AASHO Road Test constants.
effective positive temperature differential
ratio of stress with friction to stress with bond
radius of relative stiffness
log of slope of TD effect on stress
stress due to load
total stress due to load and temperature

TD
F
l
log b
sigma l
sigma t

10.46 deg F
1.00
58.89
in
-1.438
87.47 psi
120.64
psi

ok
ok
ok
ok now (had 68 instead of 6)
ok
ok

Values for the following parameters are calculated to determine the required slab thickness for the design ESALs.
allowable log ESALs for 50% reliability, new design
allowable log W for 50% reliability, AASHO Road Test
log rho term
serviceability loss term
beta term
allowable ESALs for design reliability, new design
expected ESALs for design reliability, new design
ratio of expected to allowable ESALs
98 AASHTO

log W'
log W
log R
G
B
W'
W18R

8.15
8.67
8.86
-0.19
1.00
49,988,514
49,988,514
1.00

ok
ok
ok
ok
ok
ok
ok
ok

Joint Faulting Check for 1998 AASHTO Supplement Procedure

Predicted faulting

doweled

0.07 in

undoweled

Enter values for the following parameters to calculate faulting for doweled or undoweled joints.
parameter
dowel diameter
cumulative ESALs
age
modified drainage coefficient
friction adjustment factor
annual temperature range
Freezing Index
base type
widened slab
days above 90 deg F

symbol
dowel
cesal
age
Cd
con
trange
FI
basetype
widen
days90

value

units

1.25
in
40 millions
20
years
1.00
0.80
85
deg F
200 F deg-days
0
0
30

The values below are calculated or taken from the 98 AASHTO worksheet.
joint spacing
distribution factor
moment of inertia dowel x-section
relative stiffness dowel-concrete
average joint opening
concrete bearing stress
annual precipitation

jtspace
fd
I
beta
opening
bstress
precip

98 fault chk

20
0.35
0.1198
0.6060
0.049
1412
55.80

ft
in
in4
in
psi
in

0.11 in

12

494

50

55
56

46
44

7
8

448
380

0
0

68
68
68
65

56
53
60
44

8
9
8
9

12
7
10
37

74
48
30
75

39

37

11

2224

45

44

966

55

42

306

101
0

MASSACHUSETTS
Boston
52

44

12

0
0
0

63
0
0

Worcester
MICHIGAN
Detroit

48

12

49

47
48

29
34

15
15

10
9

588
544

0
0

38
45

50

44

690

58

39

200

54

41

371

68
68

65
49

9
7

16
27

61
52

35
26

15
10

7
6

2385
5601

0
0

King Salmon
ARIZONA
Flagstaff
Phoenix

33

19

11

2898

45
71

21
7

7
6

585
0

0
157

Tucson
ARKANSAS

68

11

133

Little Rock
CALIFORNIA
Bakersfield

62

49

102

64

66

98

Fresno
Los Angeles

63
63

11
12

6
8

0
0

Sacramento
San Diego
San Francisco

61
64
57

17
9
20

8
7
11

Santa Barbara
COLORADO

59

16

Colorado Springs
Denver
CONNECTICUT
Hartford

49
50

Wichita
KENTUCKY
Lexington
Louisville
LOUISIANA
Baton Rouge
Lake Charles
New Orleans
Shreveport
MAINE
Caribou
Portland
MARYLAND
Baltimore

Flint
Grand Rapids
MINNESOTA
Duluth
Minneapolis
MISSISSIPPI
Jackson
MISSOURI
Kansas City
MONTANA
Great Falls

Mean Annual Days 90F

and Above

40

Mobile
Montgomery
ALASKA
Anchorage
Fairbanks

KANSAS
Topeka

Freezing Index, degreedays below 32F

56

Mean Annual Wind

Speed, mi/h

74

Mean Annual
Precipitation, in

673

Location

Mean Annual
Temperature, F

10

52

Wilmington
FLORIDA

Mean Annual Days 90F

and Above

Mean Annual Wind

Speed, mi/h

29

62

DC
Washington
DELAWARE

Freezing Index, degreedays below 32F

Mean Annual
Precipitation, in

Mean Annual Days 90F

and Above

Freezing Index, degreedays below 32F

54

Mean Annual
Precipitation, in

Mean Annual
Temperature, F

ALABAMA
Birmingham

Mean Annual
Temperature, F

Location

Mean Annual Wind

Speed, mph

Climatic Data for Use With 1998 AASHTO Supplement Thickness and Faulting Models

60

31

13

195

59

60

39

10

231

60

54
53
52

20
37
40

5
8
7

61
45
41

31
0
0

PENNSYLVANIA
Harrisburg
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh

53
54
50

39
41
36

8
10
9

454
376
686

0
0
0

RHODE ISLAND
Providence

Location

OKLAHOMA
Oklahoma City
Tulsa
OREGON
Medford
Portland
Salem

50

45

11

513

SOUTH CAROLINA
Charleston
65
Columbia
63

52
49

9
7

19
54

6
46

446

SOUTH DAKOTA
Huron

45

19

12

1840

860

47

16

11

1232

10

857

59

53

140

11
10

1015
996

0
0

Knoxville
Memphis

59
62

47
52

7
9

184
105

0
61

48

213

11
11

2472
1848

0
0

Nashville
TEXAS
Amarillo
Brownsville

59

30
26

57
74

19
25

14
12

200
0

41
97

65

53

52

82

56

35

11

724

Corpus Christi
Dallas
El Paso

72
66
63

30
29
8

12
11
9

0
40
0

87
89
98

45

15

13

1513

Galveston
Houston

70
68

40
45

11
8

0
0

0
76

47

Rapid City
TENNESSEE
Chattanooga

Jacksonville
Miami
Orlando

68
76
72

53
58
48

8
9
9

9
0
0

56
0
85

NEBRASKA
Omaha
NEVADA

50

30

11

1042

Lubbock
Midland
San Antonio

60
64
69

18
14
29

12
11
9

76
22
5

56
93
95

Tallahassee
Tampa

67
72

65
47

6
9

11
0

82
12

Las Vegas
Reno

66
49

4
7

9
7

0
258

127
39

Waco
Wichita Falls

67
64

31
27

11
12

27
91

96
85

West Palm Beach

GEORGIA
Atlanta
Augusta

75

60

53

42

10

374

52

15

519

38

61
63

49
43

9
7

81
40

0
52

56

122

53

UTAH
Salt Lake City
VERMONT
Burlington

44

34

1464

Macon
Savannah
HAWAII
Hilo
Honolulu

65
66

45
50

8
8

27
14

69
38

74
77

128
23

7
12

0
0

0
0

VIRGINIA
Norfolk
Richmond
Roanoke
WASHINGTON

60
58
56

45
44
39

11
8
8

111
175
227

0
0
0

51
47

12
11

9
10

576
958

23
0

Olympia
Seattle
Spokane
WEST VIRGINIA
Charleston

50
53
47

51
39
17

7
9
9

72
31
686

0
0
0

55

42

377

Huntington
WISCONSIN
Green Bay
Madison
Milwaukee

55

41

369

44
45
46

28
31
31

10
10
12

1630
1461
1202

0
0
0

45
46

11
13

13
13

1128
834

0
0

IDAHO
Boise
Pocatello
ILLINOIS
Chicago

49

33

10

1017

Peoria
Springfield
INDIANA
Evansville
Fort Wayne

50
53

35
34

10
11

988
828

0
0

56
50

42
34

8
10

483
910

0
0

Indianapolis
South Bend
IOWA
Des Moines
Sioux City

52
49

39
38

10
10

727
878

0
0

50
48

31
25

11
11

1202
1366

0
0

46

33

11

1602

Waterloo

NEW JERSEY
Atlantic City
NEW MEXICO
Albuquerque
NEW YORK
Albany
Buffalo
New York City
Rochester

47
48
55
48

36
38
44
31

9
12
12
10

1004
860
321
852

0
0
0
0

Syracuse
NORTH CAROLINA
Charlotte
Greensboro
Raleigh

48

39

10

922

60
58
59

43
42
42

8
8
8

78
137
104

0
0
0

Wilmington
NORTH DAKOTA
Bismarck
Fargo
OHIO

63

53

41

41
41

15
20

10
12

2319
2598

0
0

50
50
52
52
48

36
35
37
35
37

10
11
9
10
10

757
768
678
690
861

0
0
0
0
0

Akron-Canton
Cleveland
Columbus
Dayton
Youngstown

climate

WYOMING
Casper
Cheyenne

Seasonally Adjusted Design K Value for 1986/1993 AASHTO Guide Procedure

Enter the number of months for each season, so that total number of months is twelve.
Enter a k value for each season.
Press the "solve for seasonally adjusted k value" button.
Use this seasonally adjusted design k value in the 86 AASHTO thickness design worksheet.

Season

Months

k value

W'

log Relative

spring

(psi/in)
50

(millions)
43.69

Damage
0.0229

summer
fall
winter

3
3
3

150
150
200

51.05
51.05
53.56

0.0196
0.0196
0.0187

Weighted Mean Relative Damage

Weighted Mean W' (millions)

0.0202
49.545

Seasonally adjusted effective k value (psi/in)

124

For the purpose of calculating the seasonally adjusted design k value, a trial slab thickness is calculated using
the inputs from the 86 AASHTO worksheet and the arithmetic average of the seasonal k values above.

parameter
slab thickness
arithmetic average k value

symbol

value

units

D
kave

14.82
138

in
psi/in

The values for the following parameters are taken from the 86 AASHTO worksheet.
W18

estimated future ESALs

design reliability
overall standard deviation
mean 28-day concrete elastic modulus
mean 28-day concrete flexural strength
base elastic modulus
base thickness
Depth to rigid foundation
design k value
initial serviceability
terminal serviceability
drainage coefficient
load transfer coefficient

R
So
Ec
S'c
Eb
Hb
Hrig
k
P1
P2
Cd
J

3,716,407
97
0.37
4,200,000
600
25,000
8
20
124
4.3
2.5
1.00
3.2

%
psi
psi
psi
in
ft
psi/in

Values for the following parameters are calculated from the trial thickness and above inputs.

ZR
kinf
kfin

standard normal deviate

composite k value for semi-infinite foundation
composite k value for finite depth to rigid layer
allowable log ESALs for design reliability
allowable ESALs for design reliability
expected ESALs
ratio of expected to allowable ESALs

log W'
W'
W18

-1.881
169
145
7.70
49,552,485
3,716,407
0.07

psi/in
psi/in

Values for the following parameters are calculated during the seasonally adjusted effective k value calculation.
allowable ESALs for design reliability, new design
weighted mean W'
ratio weighted mean W' to allowable ESALs
86 seasonal k

49.55 millions
49.54 millions
1.000

1986 AASHTO Guide Procedure for Concrete Pavement Thickness Design

Whenever you change input values below, first click the button "recalculate seasonally adjusted effective k value"
before solving for the required slab thickness or allowable ESALs.

Enter values for the following parameters in the 1986/1993 AASHTO concrete pavement performance model.
parameter

symbol

slab thickness
estimated future ESALs
design reliability
overall standard deviation
mean 28-day concrete elastic modulus
mean 28-day concrete flexural strength
base elastic modulus
base thickness
depth to rigid foundation
roadbed soil k value
initial serviceability
terminal serviceability
drainage coefficient
load transfer coefficient

D
W18
R
So
Ec
S'c
Eb
Hb
Hrig
k
P1
P2
Cd
J

value units
10.00
in
3,716,407
97
%
0.37
4,200,000
psi
600
psi
25,000
psi
8
in
20
ft
124 psi/in
4.3
2.5
1.00
3.2

Values for the following parameters are calculated to determine the required slab thickness for the design ESALs.
ZR
kinf
kfin

standard normal deviate

composite k value for semi-infinite foundation
composite k value for finite depth to rigid layer
allowable log ESALs for design reliability
allowable ESALs for design reliability
expected ESALs
ratio of expected to allowable ESALs

log W'
W'
W18

86 AASHTO

-1.881
169 psi/in
145 psi/in
6.57
3,716,407
3,716,407
1.00