Thickness Design for Concrete

Highway and Street Pavement

(Portland Cement Association-PCA Method)

1
Introduction
 The PCA method for rigid pavement design is based
on a combination of theoretical studies,results of
model and full-scale tests, and experience gained
from the performance of concrete pavements
normally constructed and carrying normal traffic
loads
 The design procedure was initially published in 1961
but was revised in 1984
 The procedure provides for the determination of the
pavement thickness for plain concrete, simply
reinforced concrete, and continuously reinforced
concrete pavements

2
Design Steps
Select Trial
Pavement

Fatigue & Erosion

Analysis

Traffic Loading Analysis

∑ Nx % ≈ 100%
∑ Nf , Ne
3
Design Criteria
 Expected Repetition (Nx)  Traffic Load
 Allowable Repetition-Fatigue (Nf)  MR, k
 Allowable Repetition-Erosion (Ne)  EF
 Criteria :
∑ Nx % ≈ 100%
∑ Nf , Ne

4
Design Factors
 The basic factors considered in the PCA
design method are :
 Flexural strength of the concrete
 Sub-grade strength
 Sub-base strength
 Traffic load

5
Flexural Strength of Concrete
 The flexural strength of the concrete used in this
procedure is given in terms of the modulus of
rupture obtained by the third-point method (ASTM
Designation C78)
 The average of the 28 days test results is used as
input by the designer
 The design charts and tables, however, incorporate
the variation of the concrete strength from one
point to another in the concrete slab and the gain in
strength with age

6
PCC Modulus of Rupture (Flexural
Strength)
 The modulus of rupture (flexural strength) of
portland cement is the mean value
determined after 28 days using Third Point
Loading (AASHTO T 97, ASTM C78)
fcf=0.75 (f’c)0.5
fcf = flexural strength (MPa)

f’c = PCC compresive strength (MPa)

 Typical value : 578 psi

7
Elastic Modulus (Ec) of PCC
 The following is a correlation recommended
by the American Concrete Institute for
normal weight Portland Cement Concrete :
Ec=57,000 (f’c)0.5
Ec = PCC Elastic Modulus (psi)
f’c = PCC compresive strength (psi)

1 kg/cm2 = 0.1 MPa

1 kg/cm2 = 14.23 psi

8
Subgrade & Subbase Strength
 The Modulus of sub-grade reaction (k) is used to
define the sub-grade and sub-base support
 This can be determined by performing a plate
bearing test or correlating with other test results
using the chart in the following Figure
 The modulus of sub-grade reaction can be increased
by adding a layer of untreated granular material
over the sub-grade
 An approximate value of the increased k can be
obtained from the following Table

9
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k)
 The modulus of subgrade reaction (k) is used as a primary input for rigid
pavement design. It estimates the support of the layers below a rigid
pavement surface course (the PCC slab). The k-value can be determined by
field tests or by correlation with other tests. There is no direct laboratory
procedure for determining k-value.
 The modulus of subgrade reaction came about because work done by
Westergaard during the 1920s developed the k-value as a spring constant to
model the support beneath the slab (see Figure below)

 The reactive pressure to resist a load is thus proportional to the spring deflection (which
is a representation of slab deflection) and k (see Figure 4.11):
where:
P=reactive pressure to support deflected slab
k=spring constant = modulus of subgrade reaction, ranges from about 13.5
MPa/m (50 pci) for weak support, to over 270 MPa/m (1000 pci) for strong
support
D=slab deflection
10
 Plate Load Test
 The plate load test presses a steel bearing
plate into the surface to be measured
with a hydraulic jack.

 The resulting surface deflection is read

from dial micrometers near the plate edge
and the modulus of subgrade reaction is
determined by the following equation:

where:
k=spring constant = modulus of subgrade reaction
P=applied pressure (load divided by the area of the 762 mm (30 inch) diameter plate)
Δ=measured deflection of the 762 mm (30 inch) diameter plate 11
 Correlation of k to Soil Properties

Soil Density CBR MR E k

A-1-a, well 125 - 140 60 - 80 22 - 35 30 - 43 300 - 450

A-1-a, poor 120 - 130 35 - 60 22 - 31 30 - 38 300 - 400
… … … … … ...

A-2-4,5 gravelly 130 - 145 40 - 80 22 - 40 30 - 47 300 - 500

A-2-4, 5 sandy 120 - 135 20 - 40 22 - 31 30 - 38 300 - 400
… … … … … ...

A-4, silt 90 - 105 4- 8 < 11 6 - 18 25 - 165

A-4, mix 100 - 125 5 - 15 < 15 7 - 23 40 - 220
… … … … … ...

12
 Degree of Saturation Affects
k of Fine-Grained Soils
250

A-6
A-7-6
200 A-7-5
A-6 A-5
Subgrade k value (psi/in)

A-4
150
A-5 A-7-5
A-4
100
A-7-6

50

0
50 60 70 80 90 100

Degree of saturation (percent)

13
14
15
Design Criteria
 Expected Repetition (Nx)  Traffic Load
 Allowable Repetition-Fatigue (Nf)  MR, k
 Allowable Repetition-Erosion (Ne)  EF
 Criteria :
∑ Nx % ≈ 100%
∑ Nf , Ne

16
Two Mode of Analysis
 Fatigue Analysis
 to control fatigue cracking
 Erosion Analysis
 To control foundation and shoulder erosion,
pumping, and faulting

17
Fatigue Analysis
 The objective of fatigue analysis is to determine the minimum
thickness of the concrete required to control fatigue cracking
 This is done by comparing the expected axle repetitions with
the allowable repetitions for each axle load and ensuring that
the cumulative repetitions are less than the allowable
 Allowable axle repetitions depend on the stress ratio factor,
which is the ratio of the equivalent stress of the pavement to
the modulus of rupture of the concrete
 The equivalent stress of the pavement depends on the
thickness of the slab and the sub-base and sub-grade ‘k’
 The following chart can be used to determine the allowable
load repetitions based on the stress ratio factor
 The following tables give equivalent stress values for
pavements without concrete shoulders and with concrete
shoulders, respectively

18
 Fatigue Analysis
 Stress Ratio

EquivalentStress
StressRatio =
ModulusofRupture

19
20
Equivalent Stress

21
22
Fatigue Models

23
CONCRETE FATIGUE DAMAGE MODEL
Erosion Analysis
 The objective of he erosion analysis is to determine the
minimum thickness of the pavement required to control
foundation and shoulder erosion, pumping and faulting
 The erosion analysis is similar to that of fatigue analysis,
except that an erosion factor is used instead of the stress
factor
 The erosion factor is also dependent on the thickness of the
slab and the sub-grade & sub-base ‘k’
 The following tables give erosion factors for different types of
pavement construction The following chart can be used to
determine the allowable load repetitions based on erosion
 Erosion Factor
 Table 7 and Table 8

25
26
27
28
Design Steps
Select Trial
Pavement

Fatigue & Erosion

Analysis

Traffic Loading Analysis

∑ Nx % ≈ 100%
∑ Nf , Ne
29
Traffic Load (1/2)
 The traffic load is computed in terms of the cumulated number
of single and tandem axles of different loads projected for the
design period of the pavement
 The information required to determine cumulated numbers are
 The average daily traffic (ADT)
 The average daily truck traffic (ADTT) in both directions
 The axle load distribution of truck traffic
 Only trucks with six or more tires are included in this design (it
can be assumed that truck volume is the same in each
direction of travel
 When there is reason to believe that truck volume varies in
each direction, an adjustment factor can be used

30
1 kips = 1 k.lbs
= 4.448 kN
31
Traffic Load (2/2)
 The design also incorporates a load safety factor (LSF), which
is used to multiply each axle load
 The recommended LF values are :
 1.2 for interstate and multilane projects with uninterrupted
traffic flow and high truck volumes
 1.1 for highways and arterials with moderate truck volume
 1.0 for roads and residential street with very low truck volume
 The LSF can be increased to 1.3 if the objective is to maintain
a higher-than-normal pavement serviceability level throughout
the design life of the pavement
 The design procedure also provides for a factor of safety of 1.1
or 1.2 over and above the LSF to allow for unexpected truck
traffic

32
Cumulative Growth Factors (CGF)

33
Design Type
 Axle-Load Data Available
 Axle-Load Data Not Available
(Simplified Design Procedure)

34
1 kips = 1 k.lbs
= 4.448 kN
35
36
Comparison of Design

37
38
39
40
41
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

42
Traffic Load (1/2)
 The traffic load is computed in terms of the cumulated number
of single and tandem axles of different loads projected for the
design period of the pavement
 The information required to determine cumulated numbers are
 The average daily traffic (ADT)
 The average daily truck traffic (ADTT) in both directions
 The axle load distribution of truck traffic
 Only trucks with six or more tires are included in this design (it
can be assumed that truck volume is the same in each
direction of travel
 When there is reason to believe that truck volume varies in
each direction, an adjustment factor can be used

43
44
1 kips = 1 k.lbs
= 4.448 kN
45
46
STRESSES IN RIGID PAVEMENTS

Wheel Load Stresses

Temperature Stresses

Frictional Stresses
48
49
TEMPERATURE STRESSES
 Temperature
Curling stress dueStresses
to
Temperature Gradient
• If the top slab is hotter than the bottom slab
then top surface tends to expand and the
bottom surface tends to contract resulting in
compressive stress at the top and tensile
stress at bottom; and vice versa

51
 Analysis of Thermal Gradients
Daytime curling:
Top of slab heats relative to the bottom during a warm day

52
 Analysis of Thermal Gradients
Nighttime curling:
Top of slab cools relative to the bottom after a warm day

53
FRICTIONAL STRESSES

•Shrinkage
•Temperatur
 Frictional Stresses

• Due to the contraction of slab due to shrinkage or

due to drop in temperature tensile stresses are in
the slab

• For JPCP, the spacing between contraction joints is

so chosen that the stresses due to friction will not
cause the concrete to crack.
 TEGANGAN FRIKSI AKIBAT SHRINKAGE

∆sh ∆sh

slab
Frictional Force Frictional Force

base