0% found this document useful (0 votes)
19 views4 pages

Malamtam-Bitabit-Catao FMR Bridge Design

The document outlines the construction project for the Malamtam-Bitabit-Catao FMR with a bridge, detailing the design traffic calculations for various vehicle types over a 20-year period. It includes methods for determining the Cumulative Equivalent Single Axle Load (CESAL) and the thickness of the rigid pavement required based on design parameters. The final design specifies a PCCP thickness of 23 cm, with various pavement design parameters provided for the project.

Uploaded by

Kent Falitang
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
19 views4 pages

Malamtam-Bitabit-Catao FMR Bridge Design

The document outlines the construction project for the Malamtam-Bitabit-Catao FMR with a bridge, detailing the design traffic calculations for various vehicle types over a 20-year period. It includes methods for determining the Cumulative Equivalent Single Axle Load (CESAL) and the thickness of the rigid pavement required based on design parameters. The final design specifies a PCCP thickness of 23 cm, with various pavement design parameters provided for the project.

Uploaded by

Kent Falitang
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

NAME OF PROJECT: CONSTRUCTION OF MALAMTAM - BITABIT - CATAO FMR WITH BRIDGE

STATION LIMIT: 00+000.00 T0 9+088.75

LOCATION: Catao, Buringal, Paracelis, Mountain Province

RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN USING CUMULATIVE EQUIVALENT SINGLE AXLE LOAD (CESAL)

1.) Determine the Design Traffic for Each Vehicle Type.

Design Traffic = Pi (1+i)n - 1 365


i
where,
Pi = Annual Average Daily Traffic
i = Traffic Growth Rate
N = Design Life Period (20 years for PCCP,10 years for ACP)

2.) Determine the Traffic Equivalence Factor (EF) for each vehicle type.

The damaging effect per pass to a pavement by a type of axle relative to the damage per pass of a
standard axle load ( ussually the 8,200 kg. single axle load) is expressed as Equivalent Factor (EF). The EF
for each axle is calculated using the following

axle load(tons) 4
EF =
8.2

Then, determine the EF for each vehicle type.


4
axle load(tons)
EF = Σ
8.2

3.) Compute the Cumulative Equivalent Single Axle Load (CESAL) for each vehicle type.

ESAL = (Design Traffic x DD x DL) EF

where,
DD = Directional distribution factor, which is generally 50%
DL = Lane Distribution Factor

The DL factor may be calculated using the Table:

Table for Lane Distribution Factor


Number of Lanes in each Percentage of 18-tons ESAL in
direction the design Lane
1 100%
2 80% - 100%
3 60% - 80%
4 50% - 75%

4.) Add the ESAL for all vehicle types.

CESAL = Design x 50% x 100% x + Design x 50% x 100% x


EF2 axle EF3 axle
(W18) Traffic2 axle Traffic3 axle

+ Design x 50% x 100% x EF4 axle


Traffic3 axle
DETAILED CALCULATION OF CESAL

I) DATA
- Taken from the AADT of a given road section.

Truck Type AADT (one direction)


2-axle 62
3-axle 4
4-axle 0

Assumed traffic growth rate = 4%


Design Period = 20 years

II) DESIGN CALCULATION

1. Determine the Design Traffic for each truck type.

a) 2-axle trucks = 62 (1+ 0.04 )20- 1 365 = 673,878


4%

b) 3-axle trucks = 4 (1+ 0.04 )20- 1 365 = 43,476


4%

c) 4-axle trucks = 0 (1+ 0.04 )20- 1 365 = 0


4%

2. Determine the equivalence factor (EF) for each axle and truck type.

The table on GVW and maximum allowable axle load prescribed under RA 8794 as shown will be used in
calculating the EF of each truck type.

GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT (GVW) PER RA 8794


Truck Type Code GVW (kg.)
2 - axle 1-1 16,880
3 - axle 1-2 27,250
4 - axle 11 - 3 30,380

Maximum allowable axle load = 13,500.00 kg.

a) In a 2 - axle truck, the load distribution for each axle is as shown in the figure below

Axle 1 Axle 2

Dist. b/n axles

0.2 (GVW) 0.8 (GVW)


= 3.38 tons 13.50 tons

3.38 4 13.50 4
EF2 axle = + = 7.38
8.2 8.2

b) In a 3 - axle truck, the load distribution for each axle is as shown in the figure below

Axle 1 Axle 2 Axle 3

Dist. b/n axles

0.2 (GVW) 0.4 (GVW) 0.4 (GVW)


5.45 tons 10.90 tons 10.90 tons

5.45 4 10.90 4 10.90 4


EF3 axle = + + = 6.44
8.2 8.2 8.2

c) In a 4 - axle truck, the load distribution for each axle is as shown in the figure below
Axle 1 Axle 2 Axle 3 Axle 4

0.169 (GVW) 0.298 (GVW) 0.279 (GVW) 0.254 (GVW)


5.13 tons 9.05 tons 8.48 tons 7.72 tons

4 4 4 4
5.13 9.05 8.48 7.72
EF3 axle = + + + = 3.57
8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2

3. Determine for CESAL for all types of Vehicles

CESAL (W18) = ( 673,878 x 50% x 100% x 7.38 ) + ( 43,476 x 50% x 100% x 6.44 )

+( 0 x 50% x 100% x 3.57 )

= 2.63 x 10⁶

4. Determine the Thickness of PCCP

Rigid Pavement Design Design Conditions:


- Design Period: 20 years
- Loading: Actual (100%)
Design Equation: (including overloaded-trucks)
log10W18 = ZR*So + 7.35*log10(D+1) - 0.06 + {log10[APSI/(4.5 - 1.5)]} / {1 + [(1.624*107)/(D+1)8.46]} - Design ESAL: 2.630 x 106
+ (4.22 - 0.32pt)*log10{[Sc' * Cd(D0.75 - 1.132)] / [215.63*J(D0.75-(18.42/(Ec/k)0.25))]} - Concrete Strength: 3,500 psi
DESIGN PARAMETERS: Flexural at 14-days (3.80 kN/mm2)
Design Performance Period, = 20 years Note: Without Dowel Bars
Design Traffic: (ESAL), W18 = 2.630 x 106 (18 KIP ESAL)
Design Reliability, R= 85 % PAVEMENT STRUCTURE
Standard Normal Deviation, ZR = -1.037
Standard Error, So = 0.35 PCCP Thickness
Design Terminal Serviciability Index, pt = 2.00 T= 23 cm
Design Serviciability Loss, APSI = 2.50
PCCP Modulus of Rapture, S'c = 560 psi Aggregate Sub-Base Thickness
PCCP Modulus of Elasticity, Ec = 3.372 x 106 psi T= 15 cm
Design Subgrade, CBR = 19.00% ////\\\\////\\ Subgrade CBR = 19.00%
Effective Roadbed Resilient Modulus, Mr = 12,800 psi
Sub-base Elastic Modulus Esb = 15,000 psi (MR = 12,800 psi )
Sub-base Thickness, Item 200 = 15 cm
Effective Modulus @ Subgrade Reaction, k= 550.00 pci
Drainage Coefficient, Cd = 1.00
Load Transfer Coefficient, J= 3.80 Without Dowel Bars
Loss of Support, LS = 1.00
kcorrected = 180 pci

(For try&error computation)


6.420 6.419

Result:
D= 8.93 inches o.k. !!! 22.68 cm, Say 23 cm ( = 9.1 inches )

Notes: Without Dowel Bars at Contraction Joints

Since the computed D is 226.8 mm but the calculated CESAL is less than 7 x 10 6 per D.O. # 22, series of 2011,
the total Thickness of PCCP D = 230 cm shall be adopted for this particular project.

PREPARED: CHECKED:
PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS

DESIGN PERFORMANCE PERIOD = 20 YEARS


DESIGN TRAFFIC (ESAL) W18 = 4.200 x 106 (18 KIP ESAL)
DESIGN RELIABILITY R = 85 %
STANDARD NORMAL DEVIATION ZR = -1.037
STANDARD DEVIATION So = 0.35
TERMINAL SERVICIABILITY INDEX pt = 2.00
DESIGN SERVICIABILTY LOSS APSI = 2.50 (4.5-2.5)
PCCP MODULUS OF RUPTURE S'c = 632 psi
DRAINAGE COEFFICIENT Cd = 1.00
LOAD TRANSFER COEFFICIENT J = 3.80 Without Dowel Bars
PCCP MODULUS OF ELASTICITY Ec = 3.360 x 106 psi
SUBGRADE DESIGN CBR CBR = 6.00
EFFECTIVE ROADBED RESILIENT MODULUS MR = 8,000.00 psi
SUBBASE ELASTIC MODULUS ESB = 15,000.00 psi
SUB-BASE THICKNESS = 6.00 " (150mm)
EFECTIVE MODULUS AT SUBGRADE
REACTION k = 430 pci
CORRECTED EFFECTIVE AT SUBGRADE
REACTION kcorrected = 146 pci

You might also like