IRC:58-2015 Guidelines for Design of

Plain Jointed Rigid Pavements for Highways

Example of Design of Slab Thickness for Pavement
(with and without doweled transverse joints. Beta value will be 0.66 for doweled joint and 0.90 for without dowels case)
Ty p e o f p a v e m e n t c o n s i d e r e d P av e me n t Structural Details
4-lane
Carri ageway Modulus of subgrade reaction of subgrade, MPa/m 50.3
divided
Thickness of Granular Subbase, mm
150
Shoulders :- Tied concrete shoulders ? (yes/no) yes Thickness o f Dr y L ean Concrete subbase, m m 150

Transverse joint spacing ( m) 4.5

Effective modulus of subgrade reaction of foundation,
285
MPa/m
Lane width (m) 3.5 U n i t w e i gh t o f C o nc r e t e , k N / m 3 24
Transverse Joints hav e do w e l ba rs ? (yes/no) yes 28-day Flexural strength of c e me n t concrete, M P a 4.5
M a x . d ay - t i me Te m p e r a t u r e D iffer ent ia l i n slab, 0 C (for
D e s i g n Tra ff ic E s t i ma t i on bottom-up cracking)
16.8

N i gh t - t i m e Te m p e r a t u r e D iffer ent ia l in slab, 0 C (for top-

Design Period (years) 30 13.4
down cracking) = day-time diff/2 + 5
Total Two-way Commercial Traffic (cvpd) in the year of
completion of construction 6000 Trial Thickness of Concrete Slab, m 0.28
Av. Annual rate of growth of commercial traffic Load Transfer Efficiency Factor for TDC analysis, Beta =
(exressed as decimal) 0.075 0.66
Cumulative No of Commercial vehicles during design 066 for dowel oints 090 for oints without dowels
period (two-way), A 226444692 Elastic Modulus of Concrete, Ec (MPa) 30000
Average No of axles per commercial vehicle, B
2.35 Poisson's Ratio of Concrete, Mu 0.15
Cumulative No of Commercial Axles during design
period (two-way), C = A*B 532145025 Radius of relative stiffness, m 0.66621
Proportion of traffic in predominant direction (For 2-lane
2-way highways use a value of 1.0), D 0.50 Desi gn Ax l e L o a d Repetitions fo r Fatigue Ana lysis
Lateral Placement factor (0.25 for 2-lane 2-way. For
multilane highways the value is 0.25 X C), E 0.125 F o r B o t t o m - u p C r a c k i n g A na l y s i s
Factor for selection of traffic for BUC analysis (for six-
0.2 Front single (steering) Axles = H * K1 5986632
hour period during day), F
Factor for selection of traffic for TDC analysis (for six- 1995544
0.3 Rear single Axles = H * K2
hour period during day), G
3325906
Design axle repetitions for BUC analysis (for 6 hour day
13303626 Tandem Axles = H * K3
time traffic), H = B*E*F 1995544
Proportion of vehicles with spacing between front and
the first rear axle less than the spacing of transverse 0.55 Tridem Axles = H * K4
joints, I
Design axle repetitions for TDC analysis (for 6-hour 4938971
night time traffic), J = B*E*G*I 10975491 Fo r To p - D o w n C r a c k in g Analysis
1646324
Proportion of Front single (steering) Axles, K1 0.450 Front single (steering) Axles = J * K1 2743873
Proportion of Rear single Axles,K2 0.150 Rear single Axles = J * K2 1646324
Proportion of tandem Axles, K3 0.250 Tandem Axles = J * K3
Proportion of Tridem Axles, K4 = (1-K1-K2-K3) 0.150 Tridem Axles = J * K4
 Fat
Axle Load Spectrum Data Bottom-up Cracki ng Fatigue Analysis for Day-time (6 hour)
traffi c a n d P o s i t i v e Te m p e r a t u r e D i f f e re n t i a l

R ear Single Axle R e a r Ta n d e m A x l e R e a r Tr i d e m A x l e R e a r Single A xle s R e a r Ta n d e m A x l e s

L o ad Mid-Point of Mid-Point of Lo ad Mid-Point of Expected Flex S t r e ss Allowable Fat i gue Expected Flex S t r e ss Allowable Fa t i gue
F r e que nc y Loa d Group F r e q u e nc y F r e q ue n c y
Gro up Loa d Group Loa d Group Gro up Load Group R e pe t it i ons Stress Ra tio R e p et it i ons Damage R e p e t i ti ons Stress Ratio R e p e ti t i ons Damage
(%) (kN) (%) (%)
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni)

185-195 190 18.15 380 - 400 390 14.5 530-560 545 5.23 362191 2.503 0.506 588331 0.616 482256 2 . 11 7 7 0.428 infinite 0.000

175-185 180 17.43 360 - 380 370 10.5 500-530 515 4.85 347823 2.422 0.489 1344185 0.259 349220 2.0448 0.413 infinite 0.000
165-175 170 18.27 340 - 360 350 3.63 470-500 485 3.44 364586 2.341 0.473 4072762 0.090 120730 1.972 0.398 infinite 0.000

155-165 160 12.98 320 - 340 330 2.5 440-470 455 7.12 259022 2.260 0.457 22079767 0.012 83148 1.8992 0.384 infinite 0.000

145-155 150 2.98 300 - 320 310 2.69 410-440 425 1 0 . 11 59467 2.179 0.440 infinite 0.000 89467 1.8264 0.369 infinite 0.000

135-145 140 1.62 280 - 300 290 1.26 380-410 395 12.01 32328 2.099 0.424 infinite 0.000 41906 1.7536 0.354 infinite 0.000

125-135 130 2.62 260 - 280 270 3.9 350-380 365 15.57 52283 2.018 0.408 infinite 0.000 129710 1.6808 0.340 infinite 0.000

11 5 - 1 2 5 120 2.65 240 - 260 250 5.19 320-350 335 13.28 52882 1.937 0.391 infinite 0.000 172615 1.608 0.325 infinite 0.000

1 0 5 - 11 5 11 0 2.65 220 - 240 230 6.3 290-320 305 4.55 52882 1.856 0.375 infinite 0.000 209532 1.5352 0.310 infinite 0.000

95-105 100 3.25 200 - 220 210 6.4 260-290 275 3.16 64855 1.775 0.359 infinite 0.000 212858 1.4623 0.295 infinite 0.000

85-95 90 3.25 180 - 200 190 8.9 230-260 245 3.1 64855 1.695 0.342 infinite 0.000 296006 1.3895 0.281 infinite 0.000

< 85 80 14.15 < 180 170 34.23 < 230 215 17.58 282369 1.614 0.326 infinite 0.000 11 3 8 4 5 8 1.3167 0.266 infinite 0.000

100 100 100 1995544 Fat D a m fr om Si ng. Ax l e s = 0.976 3325906 Fat D a m from Ta n d Axl e s = 0.000

Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage due to single and

tandem axle loads =
0.976 + 0.000 = 0.976
Front Single Axles and Rear Tridem axles not considered for bottom-up analysis
Sum of CFD for BUC & TDC= 1.730

Design for Bo nded Pa v ement Option

Subgrade C B R (%)= 8 Trial Slab thickness (m) over DLC, h1 0.235 Poisson's Ratio of D L 
Granular Subab se Thickness ( m m ) = 250 Provide D L C thickness (m), h2 0.15 Depth to Neutral axi
Effective k-value from Tables 2 and 3 (MPa/m) = 72.0 Elastic Modulus of Pavement Concrete (MPa), E1 30000 Flex Stiffness of des
For k of 72.0 MPa/m a nd for Elastic Modulus of DLC (MPa), E2 13600 Flex Stiffness o f Part
Doweled Joint and Tied Concrete Shoulders, Slab Thickness ( m ) = 0.3 Poisson's Ratio of Paving Concrete,  1 0.15 Flex Stiffness of DLC
 igue Damage Analysis

To p - D o w n C r a c k i n g F a t i g u e A n a l y s i s f o r N i g h t - t i m e ( 6 h o u r ) traffic a n d N e g a t i v e Te m p e r a t u r e
D i f f e ren ti al

Rear Tandem Axles Rear Tridem Axles

Rear Single Axles (Stess computed for 50% of (Stress
axle load) comuted for 33% of axle load)
Flex Allowable
Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Stress Ratio Fatigue
Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Repetitions Damage
(SR)
(ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (Ni) (ni/Ni)

298808 2.399 0.485 1768731 0.169 397862 2.42686 0.490 1267085 0.314 86103 2.3529 0.475 3370878 0.026

286954 2.344 0.473 3899961 0.074 288107 2.37136 0.479 2564487 0.112 79847 2.2974 0.464 9089367 0.009
300783 2.288 0.462 11091781 0.027 99603 2.31586 0.468 6308978 0.016 56634 2.2419 0.453 38025932 0.001

213693 2.233 0.451 52048021 0.004 68597 2.26037 0.457 21946523 0.003 117218 2.1864 0.442 infinite 0.000

49060 2.177 0.440 infinite 0.000 73810 2.20487 0.445 infinite 0.000 166443 2.1309 0.430 infinite 0.000

26670 2.122 0.429 infinite 0.000 34573 2.14938 0.434 infinite 0.000 197723 2.0754 0.419 infinite 0.000

43134 2.066 0.417 infinite 0.000 107011 2.09388 0.423 infinite 0.000 256333 2.0199 0.408 infinite 0.000

43628 2.011 0.406 infinite 0.000 142407 2.03838 0.412 infinite 0.000 218632 1.9644 0.397 infinite 0.000

43628 1.955 0.395 infinite 0.000 172864 1.98289 0.401 infinite 0.000 74908 1.9089 0.386 infinite 0.000

53506 1.900 0.384 infinite 0.000 175608 1.92739 0.389 infinite 0.000 52024 1.8534 0.374 infinite 0.000

53506 1.844 0.373 infinite 0.000 244205 1.87189 0.378 infinite 0.000 51036 1.7979 0.363 infinite 0.000

232955 1.789 0.361 infinite 0.000 939228 1.8164 0.367 infinite 0.000 289424 1.7424 0.352 infinite 0.000

1646324 Fat Dam from Sing. Axles = 0.274 2743873 Fat Dam from Tand Axles = 0.445 1646324 Fat Dam from Tridem Axles = 0.036

Total To p - D o w n Fa tigu e D a m a g e = 0.274 + 0.445 + 0.036 = 0.755

DESIGN IS UNSAFE SINCE SUM OF CFD FOR BUC AND TDC>1

LC, 0.2 Total Flexural Stiffness Provided = 46.65 + 23.28 = 69.93

is, m (See Fig.6) 0.16 wh ic h is m o r e than the Flexural Stiffness of the D es ign Slab = 69.05
ign Slab 69.05 Hence, Provide a Slab of thickness ( m) 0.235 over D L C of thickness (m) 0.15
tial Slab Provided 46.65 Slab thickness (h1 ) over D L C layer m a y b e obtained b y iteratively c hang ing h 1 a nd ma tc hing the
23.28 design stiffness wi th the c o mb i n ed stiffness provided