Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
summarized by Rao,2007. These are empirical method with or without a soil strength
test, limiting shear failure method, limiting deflection method, regression method based
studies.
The use of empirical method without a strength test dates back to the development
of Public Roads (PR) soil classification system, in which the subgrade was classified as
uniform from A-l to A-8 and non-uniform from B-l to B-3. This System was later
modified by the Highway Research Board (HRB,1945), in which soil were grouped from
A-l to A-7 and a group Index was added to differentiate the soil within each group.
The empirical method with a strength test was first used by California Highway
Depertment in 1929 (Porter, 1950) .The thickness o f the pavement was related to the
California Bearing Ratio, defined as the penetration resistance o f a subgrade soil relative
to standard crushed rock. The CBR method of design was studied extensively by the US
167
corps of engineers during the World War II and became a very popular method of
pavement design after the w a r. The IRC also used this method to determine the thickness
of individual layer of pavement. The disadvantage of this empirical method is that it can
so that shear failure will not occur. The major properties o f subgrade soil considered are
cohesion and angle of internal friction. Me Leod (1953) advocated the use o f logarithmic
pavements so that the vertical deflection will not exceed the allowable lim it. The Kansas
State Highway Commission (1947) modified Boussinesq’s equation and limited the
theory (Burmister,1943) and limited the surface deflection to 6.35mm (0.25 inch). The
use of deflection as a design criterion has the apparent advantage that it can be easily
A good example of the use o f regression equations for pavement designs is the
AASHTO method based on the result o f the road tests. The disadvantage of the method is
that the design equation can be applied only to the conditions at the road test site.
materials that relate an input ,such as a wheel load, to an output or pavement response
such as stress and strain. The response values are used to predict distress based on
necessary because theory alone has not proven sufficient to design pavements
168
realistically.. The horizontal tensile strain st at the bottom of the bituminous layer and the
vertical compressive strain ez on the subgrade are identified as the critical parameters for
theoretical in approach, through it needs calibration based upon the performance of in-
India too, the Pavement Design Guidelines IRC:37 have been updated in 2001 where the
of reinforced sections also, as it tries to relate the stress-strain parameters with the
expected life of the pavement. Figure 5.1 shows a layered bituminous pavement structure
5.2.1.1 Scope: Thes guidelines are applied to design flexible pavements for
Expressway, National Highways, State Highways, Major District Roads, and other
categories of roads. Flexible pavements are considered to include the pavements which
have bituminous surfacing and granular base and sub-base courses conforming to
5.2.1.2 Design criteria: The flexible pavements has been modeled as a three layer
structure and stresses and strains at critical locations have been computed using the linear
elastic model. To give proper consideration to the aspects of performance, the following
three types of pavement distress resulting from repeated (cyclic) application of traffic
1. Vertical compressive strain at the top of the subgrade which can cause sub-grade
2. Horizontal tensile strain or stress at the bottom o f the bituminous layer which can
While the permanent deformation within the bituminous layer can be controlled
by meeting the mix design requirements, thickness o f granular and bituminous layers are
selected using the analytical design approach so that strains at the critical points are
within the allowable limits. For calculating tensile strains at the bottom of the bituminous
layer, the stiffness o f dense bituminous macadam (DBM) layer with 60/70 bitumen has
tensile strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer is beyond certain limit. The relation
between the fatigue life of the pavement and the tensile strain in the bottom of the
IV f = 2 .2 1 x 1 0 4 x { —
r*a) 0 .8 5 4
Eqn- 5.1
the tensile strain and E is the Elastic modulus of bituminous layer. The use of the above
5.2.1.5 Rutting Criteria: The contribution o f rutting from various layers could be
different . It is reported that( Chakroborty et al,2003), 46% of rutting take place from
bituminous surface and granular base course, while the subbase and sub grade contribute
54% of the total rutting. The vertical strain at subgrade is assumed as the index of rutting
to occur in a pavement.
be expressed as
4.5337
N r = 41656 x i c r 8 x I —
e. E q n - 5 .2
subgrade strain.
171
simple design charts and a catalogue of pavement designs are added in the guidelene. The
pavement designs are given for subgrade CBR values ranging from 2% to 10% and
design traffic ranging from 1 msa to 150 msa for an average annual pavement
temperature of 35° C. The later thicknesses obtained from the analysis have been slightly
modified to adapt the designs to stage construction. Using the following simple input
parameters, appropriate designs could be chosen for the given traffic and soil strength:
- CBR of subgrade.
The method considers traffic in terms of the cumulative number o f standard axles
(8160 kg) to be carried by the pavement during the design life. This requires the
following information:
Initial traffic is determined in terms of commercial vehicles per day (CVPD). For
the structural design of the pavement only commercial vehicles are considered assuming
laden weight of three tons or more and their axle loading will be considered. Estimate of
172
the initial daily average traffic flow for any road should normally be based on 7-day 24-
hour classified traffic counts (ADT). In case o f new roads, traffic estimates can be made
on the basis of potential land use and traffic on existing routes in the area.
If adequate data is not available, it is recommended that an average annual growth rate of
For the purpose of the pavement design, the design life is defined in terms of the
cumulative number of standard axles that can be carried before strengthening of the
pavement is necessary. It is recommended that pavements for arterial roads like NH, SH
should be designed for a life of 15 years, EH and urban roads for 20 years and other
The vehicle damage factor (VDF) is a multiplier for converting the number of
commercial vehicles of different axle loads and axle configurations to the number of
commercial vehicle. The VDF varies with the axle configuration, axle loading, terrain,
type o f road, and from region to region. The axle load equivalency factors are used to
convert different axle load repetitions into equivalent standard axle load repetitions. For
173
these equivalency factors refer IRC: 37-2001. The exact VDF values are arrived after
lane is necessary as it directly affects the total equivalent standard axle load application
used in the design. Until reliable data is available, the following distribution may be
Jft
assumed.
Traffic tends to be more channelized on single roads than two lane roads and to
allow for this concentration o f wheel load repetitions, the design should be based on total
directions.
in both directions.
For the design of dual two-lane carriageway roads should be based on 75 % of the
number of commercial vehicles in each direction. For dual three-lane carriageway and
For the design of pavements to cany traffic in the range of lto 10 msa, use chart 1
and for traffic in the range 10 to 150 msa, use chart 2 of IRC: 37-2001. The-design curves
relate pavement thickness to the cumulative number of standard axles to be carried over
the design life for different sub-grade CBR values ranging from 2 % to 10 %. The design
charts will give the total thickness of the pavement for the above inputs. The total
thickness consists of granular sub-base, granular base and bituminous surfacing. The
individual layers are designed based on the recommendations given below and the
subsequent tables.
Sub-base: C14.2
Sub-base materials comprise natural sand, gravel, laterite, brick metal, crushed
stone or combinations thereof meeting the prescribed grading and physical requirements.
The sub-base material should have a minimum CBR of 20% and 30% for traffic upto 2
msa and traffic exceeding 2 msa respectively. Sub-base usually consist of granular
material or WBM and the thickness should not be less than 150 mm for design traffic less
Base: Cl 4.2
The recommended designs are for unbounded granular bases which comprise
conventional water bound macadam (WBM) or wet mix macadam (WMM) or equivalent
msa.
175
The surfacing consists of a wearing course or a binder course plus wearing course.
The most commonly used wearing courses are surface dressing, open graded premix
carpet, mix seal surfacing, semi-dense bituminous concrete and bituminous concrete. For
binder course, MOST specifies, it is desirable to use bituminous macadam (BM) for
traffic upto 5 msa and dense bituminous macadam (DBM) for traffic more than 5 msa.
by Barenberg et al (1975)b and Giroud and Noiray ( 1981). These methods are suggested
for the design of unpaved roads, providing geotextiles at the subgrade -base interface.
Barenberg considered the lateral restraint action of geotextiles in the pavement whereas
Giroud and Noiray considered the tension membrane effect of geotextiles in addition to
lateral restraint.
There are two main approaches to the design o f temporary and unpaved roads. The first
assumes no reinforcing effect of the geosynthetics that is it acts as separator only. The
Apparently the separation function is more important for thin roadway sections with
relatively small live loads where anticipated rut depth is o f the order of 50 mm to 100
mm. In such cases the design procedure assumes no reinforcing effect, which is a
conservative approach. On the other hand for large live loads on thin road sections where
176
deep ruts (> 100. mm) may occur and also for thicker road sections on soft subgrades the
maintained.
Soils having low CBR values require membrane type reinforcement. This changes the
mode of bearing capacity failure from punching shear to general shear, Tig 5.2 (Rao2007)
Method
The design method considered in the manual focuses primarily on the separation and the
filtration functions. The design method developed by Steward, Williamson and Mohney
(1977) for the U.S. Forest Services (USFS) considers the following:
• Vehicle passes;
• Axle configuration;
• Tyre pressure
177
• Rut depths.
b) Cohesionless (non-plastic)
Based on both theoretical analysis and empirical (laboratory and full scale field) tests on
geotextiles, Steward et al. (1977) determined that a certain amount of rutting would occur
under various traffic conditions, both with and without a geotextile separator and for a
given stress level acting on the subgrade. The presented this stress level in terms of
bearing capacity factors, similar to those commonly used for the design of shallow
Table 5.1: Bearing capacity factors for different ruts and traffic conditions both
Traffic
B earing capacity
Condition R uts (m m ) (passes o f 80 kN axle
factor, Nc
equivalents)
<50 > 1000 2.8
W ith o u t geotextile
> 100 < too 3.3
<50 > 1000 5.0
W ith goolextile
> 100 < 100 6.0
(ii) For the WES cone penetrometer, c = cone index divided by 10 orl 1; and
Use of Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is not recommended for soft clays.
Step 2: The subgrade strength is determined at several locations at different times of the
year. Make strength determinations at several locations where the subgrade appears to be
weakest. Strength should be evaluated at a depth of 0 to 200 mm and from 200 to 500
mm; six to ten strength measurements are recommended at each location to obtain a good
average value. Tests should be also performed when the soils are in their weakest
Step 3: Determine the maximum single axle load maximum dual wheel load and the
maximum dual tandem wheel load anticipated for the road way during the design period.
Step 4: Estimate the maximum amount of traffic anticipated for each design vehicle class.
Step 5: Establish the amount of tolerably rutting during design life of the roadway.
Step 6: Obtain appropriate subgrade stress level in terms of the bearing capacity factors
Step 7: Determine the required aggregate thickness from the USFS design charts (Figs
5.3 to 5.5) for each maximum loading. Enter the curve with appropriate bearing capacity
factors (Nc) multiplied by the design subgrade shear strength c to evaluate each required
Step 8: Select the design thickness based on the design requirements; the design
Step 9: Check the geotextile drainage and filtration requirements. Use gradation and
permeability of the subgrade, the water table conditions, and the retention and
179
permeability criteria. In high water table areas with heavy traffic, filtration criteria may
also be required.
through grab strength, sewn seam strength, tear strength; puncture strength burst strength
and UV stability). Survivability of geogrids and geotextiles for major projects should be
Giroud and Noiray (1981) proposed a design method, which has been used extensively by
the practising engineers. The method is suitable for roads on purely cohesive subgrade
and applicable to roads subject to light to medium traffic (1 - 10, passes of a standard axle
load, 80 kN) over the lifetime of the road. The subgrade is assumed to be homogeneous at
least over a thickness sufficient for the development of plastic zone and inclusion of a
geotextile increases the bearing capacity from the elastic to the ultimate bearing capacity,
P*= P- Pg
p = pressure on the subgrade due to wheel load (N/m2)
180
Therefore, p- pg = (tr+2) C u + yh
The pressure p is calculated assuming the aggregate spreads the surface load at an angle
a ’ (for reinforced case) as shown in Fig.5.7 including the aggregate weight we find
P r Ti* I +^
2 [ B + 2htano j [ L + 2htana J
Fig 5.3 U.S. forest service thickness design curve for single wheel load (steward et. al. 1977)
181
DEPTH (mm)
y>
U.S. forest service thickness design curve for dual wheel load (steward et. al. 1977)
(m m )
DEPTH
cNe (kPa)
Fig 5.5 U.S. forest service thickness design curve for tandem wheel load (steward et. al. 1977)
182
[V Zo» *| I 1°,
Subgrade soil
(a) (>>’
Fig 5.7Concept of load distribution (after G iroud and Noiray, 1981)
For a tyre pressure Pc these dimensions are found for two different cases:
Inclusion o f a geosynthetic influences the value o f 'a', but Giroud and Noiray took a
Giroud and Noiray considered the deformed shape o f geosynthetic under wheel load as
section of parabolas as shown in Fig. 5.8 the geosynthetic strain is included from:
184
b - b’
e = for a* > a
a + a’
and
for a > a’
Where,
2a = B + 2 h ta n ( a )
2a' = e - B + 2htan(<Z)
L» |
— - i =— 1 + (2(r-s)/a*)2 + aV2(r-s) In (2(r-s)/af + jh/ {1 + (2(r-s)/a’)2) - 2]
a* 2
185
t = E r. e
_ F |» , C
i^ *=
Pg a / " {1 + (a/2s)2}
Oiroud and Noiray suggested a simple formula to calculate the thickness o f the aggregate
0,I91og(Ns)
(CBR)“
where,
For other than standard axle load, it is suggested to calculate Ns from the relationship:
Ns/N = [P/Ps] 3 95
where,
Above equation is based on experience with paved roads, but it holds good for unpaved
roads also. For rut depth other than 0.075m Giroud and Noiray suggested to put {log Ns -
2.34 (r-0.075)} in place of Ns. Manipulating the above two equations and the relationship
where,
The above equation is not recommended for N larger than 10,000. For a given rut depth,
number of passes and axle load a relation can be established between ho’ and undrained
shear strength (Cu) o f the subgrade. Based on above analysis as may be required for a
given traffic and road geometry similar design curves can be reproduced as shown in
Fig.5.9.
Fig 5.9 Design chart for flexible pavements (after Giroud and Noiray, 1981)
187
The design method presently hereafter takes into account only three mechanisms
confinement of the subgrade soil, improved load distribution and tension membrane
effect.
As discussed in above sections, the vertical stress on the subgrade soil can be as large the
ultimate bearing capacity of the soil when confinement is provided. The ultimate bearing
p lim ==( ^ + 2 ) c l l N + Yh
It has been assumed that the value of the undrained shear strength, CuN at the Nth passage
for the confined subgrade the same as for the unconfined subgrade, if the ratio between
confined and unconfined subgrade stress is equal to the ratio between the plastic and
elastic limit o f the subgrade soil. The rationale behind this assumption is that fatigue of
subgrade soil results from remolding caused by repeated deformations and since
deformations are o f equivalent magnitudes in an unconfined soil at the elastic limit and a
confined soil at the plastic limit, fatigue will be the same in both cases.
The improvement in load distribution capability o f the reinforced base layer relative to
the unreinforced base layer can be quantified by replacing the angle CC0 by a larger
angle ct. The vertical stress transmitted by the base layer to the upper face o f the geogrid
becomes:
p* = (P /2 )/[(B + 2htana)(L + 2 ta ia )] + yh
188
As explained previously the normal stress is not the on both sides o f a reinforcing
element exhibiting a tensioned membrane effect. Consequently, the vertical stress on the
p —|>5“pm
The magnitude of the tensioned membrane normal stress pm, has been evaluated by
Giroud and Noiray (1981) as a function of the tensile stiffness and elongation of the
reinforcement and the shape of the deformed surface o f the surface o f the subgrade soil.
The equations presented above for the three effects, confinement, load distribution and
tensioned membrane effect, are combined to obtain the ratio R =h/ho (“thickness ratio”)
between the thickness o f the base layer with and without reinforcement respectively.
/ h» =
R = h/ L) 2 + 4v - (B + L)j / (4 h 0tana)
Y=1 /[(l+2/7i)/(B+2h0tana0)(LT2h0tana0)+2pm/P]
prepare a limited number of simple charts if pm is taken into account, however, Y (and
calculated with and without pmhave shown that: (i) if the rut depth is the effect of 0.075
m the effect on R (hence on the design thickness o f the base layer) is negligible; and (ii)
if the rut depth is 0.15m, the values of R calculated with pmis approximately 10% smaller
than the value of R calculated neglecting pm, regardless o f the other parameters.
189
difference, pm, resulting from the tensioned membrane effect is neglected, and when it is
not negligible a lump reduction of 10% of the design thickness o f the base layer is
recommended.
0.6 are presented in Fig 5.10. These values were obtained using values o f B and L
corresponding to a tire inflation pressure of 620 kN/m2. However, almost identical values
are obtained for a wide range o f tire inflation pressures, provided the thickness o f the
For simplicity, a single value of tan a 0 (0.6) was used for calculation of R. A parametric
study using a range o f values for tan a D (0.4 to 0.8) showed that R was only slightly
190
influenced by tan 0Co; particularly for ho values greater than 0.3m. Thus, while it is
recognized that a value of tan &0 of 0.6 may not represent the actual stress distribution, it
has little influence on the ratio tan a / tan cc0 and therefore little influence, on the
To use Fig. 5.10 to determine the thickness ratio, R, for design o f a reinforced unpaved
must be established.
Paved roads : - Rutting type o f deflection of the surface is unacceptable in the case of
paved roads. In this case , geosynthetics can be provided at three different locations in a
permanent road viz. at the interface between the aggregate sub-base and the subgrade
soil, within the pavement structure or with a surface overlay. In the first application the
geosynthetic act in a similar way as that in the unpaved road and can yield the following
soil.
ii) Prevents fine soil particles from the subgrade soil entering the sub
base aggregate.
iii) Reduce the need for excavation of soft fine subgrade soil.
haul road.
191
vi) Evens out settlement of the sub-base aggregate over any pockets of
high geosynthetic elastic stiffness is required to bring in some reinforcing effect. For this
application the most effective location for the geosynthetics is within the base course or
between the base course and the wearing course at a depth not less than 40 mm (John
1987). The presence of geosynthetics the tensile strength and gives the road a greater
geosynthetics restricts propagation o f reflection cracks and thereby increasing the life o f
Giroud and Noiray method of flexible pavement design with geosynthetic is developed
for clay subgrade. Since the subgrade material used in the present study is o f cohesionless
in nature so the same methodology cannot be applied directly. Design method based on
Burmister proposed a method for design of a two layer flexible pavement by the
simplifying assumption that the subgrade is the bottom layer and the surfacing, base and
subbase combine to form the top layer .Burmister further assumed that the op layer can
be treated as an elastic slab infinite in the horizontal plane . The top layer is supposed to
be resting on the bottom the bottom layer ( in the case o f subgrade ) which is assumed to
be semi infinite solid of lower modulus of elasticity compared to that o f the top layer.
192
To represent the vertical wheel load , the two layer system is assumed to acting
upon by a vertical uniformly distributed load( to represent the tyre contact pressure area)
Burmister computed the vertical displacement at the surface under the centre of
the applied load assuming the interface between the two layers is perfectly rough, for
various ratios of the modulus of elasticity of the top layer to that o f the bottom layer and
for various ratios of the“*depth of the top layer to the radius of the circular area o f the
applied load. The results o f these computations are generally shown graphically.
The displacement under the wheel load is a function of the thickness of the top
The vertical elastic displacement at the surface under the applied load is given by
A = (2pa/E (1 - p2 )
A = vertical displacement
p = contact pressure
|i = Poisson’s ratio
so, A =1.5pa/E
A =1.18pa/E
193
With further refinement in analyzing the stress in a two layered system Burmister
A = FW1.5pa/E
A = Fw 1.18pa/E
according to the mechanistic method as outlined below. Suitability o f this coir mat
reinforced roads is studied for low volume roads where bituminous layer is absent or
For calculation of strength o f subgrade plate load test is carried out. For
estimation o f strength of layered subgrade where the strength o f individual layers are
different, the plate load test is expected to give better estimation of subgrade strength
( compared to CBR t e s t ) , as in in this case all the layers get involve in sharing the
The pavement section is designed based on Burmisters two layer theory . For
for 106 repetition . Thus the repetitive effect o f load is taken into consideration in the
Burmister analysis.
Burmister ’s displacement equation used for rigid plate applied in this work is
For repetititive static plate load test on subgrade only , values o f above parameters are as
follows
A = settlement for pressure p after lmsa (million standard axle) repetition =6.14cm
(Table 4.18)
5.4.1 Calculation of two layer deflection factor (F2) for other pavement layers
For repetitive plate load test on 10 cm WBM without coir m a t, values of parameters in
a = 15 cm
A = settlement for pressure p after lmsa repetition =3. lcm (Table 4.18)
Es = 16.3 Kg/sqcm
3.1=(1.18x5.66xl5xF2)/16.3
Therefore, F2=0.5
Similar procedure is adopted to calculate deflection factor (F2) for other conditions of
pavement composition and reinforcement. The results are tabulated in Table 5.2. Fig
195
5.11 shows the relationship between F2 and WBM layer thickness for the condition of
Table 5.2: Two layer displacement factor for different pavement layer
F2vs h
-NoOoir
-W ith C a r
Fig :5..11 Relationship of F2 and thickness of pavement in a two layer system for lmsa
196
Design curve developed in Fig 5.11 is applicable for load repetition o f 1 msa .This curve
will be useful in calculating the thickness of pavement layer for any design rut depth .It
Let us consider a 2 layered flexible pavement with design wheel load of 4.0 ton and tyre
allowable deflection o f 20mm as per IRC37-2001. Assuming the bearing area as circular,
a= V [P/ (p tt) ] P= wheel load = 4000 kg , p= tyre pressure =5.66 Kg/ sqcm
= 15,0cm
A= (1.5pa x F2) / Es
A = 20mm =2.0cm
F2=0,25
Now entering the design curve with F2=0.25 , the following results are obtained.
= 15.0cm
A= (1.5pa x F2) / E s
197
A = 15mm =1.5cm
so F2=0.19
Now entering the design curve with F2=0.20 , the following results are obtained.
= 15.0cm
A= (1.5pa x F2) / E s
A = 25mm =2.5cm
so F2=0.32
Now entering the design curve with F2= 0.20, the following results are obtained.
WBM thickness required for different permissible rut will be different for both the
Table 5.3 : WBM thickness required with and without coir mat for different allowable rut
Allowable rut
W ithout CM With CM
15 25 16
20 21 11
25 16 10
■A
WBM thickness
required in cm ■ \AAthout CM
■ VUthCM
Allowable rut in mm
Fig 5.12 : WBM thickness required with and without coir mat for different allowable rut
Burn-iister’s displacement equation for rigid plate is given by the following equation
A= 1 .1 8 p ax F 2/ E s
E1JE2 - Modulus o f elasticity o f granular base (WBM) and subgrade soil respectively
F2=0.5
E1/E2 values are read from Burmister,s Curve. These values are tabulated in Table 5.4
Table 5.4: Two layer displacement deflection) factor for different pavement layer
Variation of E1/E2 for different Pavement layers with and without inclusion of coirmat
is shown through Fig 5.14 and 5.15 . The vertical compressive stress on subgrade
decreases with increase in E1/E2 values. The % reduction in E1/E2 for 10cm WBM is
observed to be highest 666.67% and lowest for 25cm (250%). This justifies the
maximum reduction of settlement (50% ) for 10cm WBM ( Table 4.19 ) and minimum
D E F L E C T * ? * E a C i'Oft
T W O - U f tl E R
E1/E2
20 25
W BM thickness in mm
While using coirmat in road construction the individual strength properties of this mat
may very from site to site . This will affect the performance of pavement. So design chart
has been tried to develop for getting pavement layer thickness with coirmat of different
strength.
Puncture resistance is a very popular and simple test for determining the strength of
and the the tensile strength of geosynthetics. This is because the material between the
inner edge of the specimen holder and and the outer edge of the puncturing rod is indeed
In the present study Puncture resistance of Coirmat is determined by CBR Push through
method. Puncture resistance of coirmat in two and three layer is determined which will
represent the single layer of coirmat of different strength. From the settlement - load
repetition curve for two and three layer of coirmat , settlement at the surface of WBM
202
layers are calculated for 1million load repetitions. Two layer displacement factor (F2) is
Table 5.5: Two layer displacement factor for different material combination
With CM With CM
PR = Puncture resistance in KN
Two layer displacement factor F2 for different layers of coir mat is shown in Table 5.5.
Pavement design curve developed for different F2 and PR value o f Coir mat is shown in
Fig 5.16. This generalizes the use of these design curve for coir mat of any PR
F2 Vs WBM thickness
-*-P R = 0
-i-PR=1.6
-a -P R = a i
- k- P R = 4 .6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
V ffiM thickness (c m )
Fig : 5.16 Design curve for flexible pavement with coirmat of different strength.
IRC 37-2001 has recommended to use pavement thickness design chart for
traffic 1-150 msa based on the CBR value of subgrade soil. Knowing the CBR value of
sub grade soil pavement thickness can be determined from the design chart published.
Thus for designing flexible pavement with coir mat by IRC method ,CBR of
subgrde soil may be considered to be CBR value of subgrade soil obtained after coirmat
inclusion. From the laboratory CBR test series it is observed that CBR value of coirmat
reinforced soil is maximum when mat is placed at 1.0cm depth ( Table 3.6, Table 5.6)
CBR value of subgrade soil is considered corresponding to test result against D/d=3 as
Mould size=15cm
1 9.6% 7,14%
From the design chart Figl o f IRC-2001, corresponding to a CBR of 9.6% and 7.14% the
observed that ERC method based on CBR value demands higher pavement thickness than
Burmister method. It is because the reinforcement and separation action of Coir mat isnot
utilized in CBR method The contribution of Coir mat is fully utilized in in this work
. Fig 5.17 shows the pavement thickness requirement by Burmister and CBR method for
Pavement thickness
required in( cm) 37.5 30 11
205
40
§ 35
I
£
c
30
25
20
15
10
l 5
£
0
Soaked CBR=7.14% Unsoaked C8R =9.6% Burrrister method
Design Method