Pavement_Report.pdf

PAVEMENT REPORT NUMBER FY14-02

FHWA Project PRA-GREE 11(1) Greenbelt Park

Prince George’s County, Maryland

Pavement Rehabilitation and Resurfacing for Main Entrance Road, Park Central Road, and adjacent Parking Areas.

June 2014

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 21400 Ridgetop Circle

Sterling, VA 20166

PRA-GREE 11(1) Pavement Report No. FY14-02

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION

1. GENERAL

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3. PROJECT PURPOSE-AND-NEED

4. REGIONAL GEOLOGY

II. PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

1. PAVEMENT CONDITION SURVEY

2. PAVEMENT CORING AND SOIL BORING

3. SAMPLING

4. FIELD TESTS AND MEASUREMENTS

5. DATA SUMMARY

6. LABORATORY INVESTIGATION

7. FINDINGS

Pavement Condition Subsurface Condition

III. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

1. PAVEMENT DESIGN

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS

1. PAVEMENT SECTION

2. EARTHWORK

V. DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

APPENDICES

Appendix A - Project Location and Geological Maps Appendix B - Pavement Condition Survey Appendix C - Boring Logs

Appendix D - Laboratory Test Results Appendix E - Pavement Design Analysis

Note: Design changes, made subsequent to distribution of this report and prior to project advertisement, will be documented by a memo inserted after the title page

PAVEMENT REPORT NUMBER FY14-02

FHWA Project PRA-GREE 11(1)

Prince George’s County, Maryland

Pavement Rehabilitation and Resurfacing for Main Entrance Road, Park Central

Road, and adjacent Parking Areas.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. General

This report presents the results of the pavement and subsurface investigations, analysis, design, and recommendations for Greenbelt Park Main Entrance Road, Park Central Road, and adjacent parking areas in Prince George’s County, Maryland. A Project Location Map is presented in Appendix A.

2. Project Description

Project PRA-GREE 11(1) consists of rehabilitation and resurfacing of four park roads and six adjacent parking areas. Route information is provided below in Table 1.

Table 1 - Route Descriptions Route # Route Name Route Length/Area

010 Main Entrance Road 0.15 miles 011 Park Central Road 2.30 miles 200 Sweetgum Picnic Loop 0.21 miles 201 Laurel Picnic Loop 0.27 miles 900 Park Police Substation Parking 9,661 sqft 902 Holly Picnic Area 31,934 sqft 903 Dogwood Nature Trail Parking 6,617 sqft 906 Park Headquarters Parking 15,388 sqft

907ZZ Sweetgum Picnic Parking Areas 21,589 sqft 908ZZ Laurel Picnic Parking Areas 21,823 sqft

3. Project Purpose-and-Need

According to Highway Design, the Purpose and Need for this project is to provide a structurally and functionally adequate pavement structure that will grant access and mobility within the Park, with a long-term service life within the project limits.

4. Regional Geology

According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the project site is underlain by Potomac Group, including Raritan and Patapsco Formations, Arundel Clay, and Patuxent

Formation consisting of interbedded quartzose gravels, quartzitic argillacesous sands, silts, and clays. A Geologic Map of the project site is presented in Appendix A.

II. PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

1. Pavement Condition Survey

The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) Pavement Section conducted a pavement condition survey on August 12th, 2011, with subsequent updated surveys as recently as November, 2013. Identified pavement distresses and their quantified severity levels were recorded in accordance with “The Distress Identification Manual for the Long- Term Pavement Performance Project, 1993” by the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP). A summary of our findings is presented in Appendix B.

2. Pavement Coring and Soil Boring

The EFLHD Subsurface Exploration Team drilled a total of 15 borings (Borings B-01 through B-11 and P-01 through P-04) on October 31st, 2011. All borings were advanced using a flight auger on a model CME 850 rotary drill rig. Borings were advanced to a depth of 5.0 feet. The Boring Logs are presented in Appendix C.

3. Sampling

Sampling of materials beneath the tip of the flight augers was performed in all borings as they were advanced. Continuous sampling was conducted from 1 to 5 feet by split-barrel sampling. Represented soil boring samples were recovered with a 2 ¼ inches outside diameter split-barrel sampler in accordance with AASHTO T200-87. Representative portions of split-barrels were preserved in glass jars for laboratory testing. The sampling sequence for soil borings are summarized on the Boring Logs presented in Appendix C, while Laboratory Test Results are documented in Appendix D.

4. Field Tests and Measurements

The EFLHD Pavement Section personnel performed the following field tests and took measurements during the course of the structural evaluation of the existing pavement and the subsurface exploration.

The locations of Borings B-01 through B-11 were determined from features present on-site and by referencing the existing roadway centerlines and ground stationing. Standard penetration tests (SPT) were performed and resistance was recorded during the recovery of each split barrel sample in accordance with AASHTO T206-87. The sampler was driven into the soil using an automatic hammer. Sample recovery measurements were made and recorded for each sampling attempt. A field description by color and texture was made for each recovered sample.

5. Data Summary

The results of field tests and measurements of all borings were recorded on the drillers’ logs and appropriate data sheets in the field. These data sheets and logs contain information concerning the boring methods; samples attempted and recovered; indications of the presence of various materials. They also contain interpretations by the subsurface exploration team leader of the conditions based on the performance of the equipment and cuttings brought to the surface by the drilling tools. Therefore, the field data represents both factual and interpretative information. The Boring Logs in Appendix C of this report represent a compilation of field and laboratory data and description of the soil samples by a pavement engineer. These records occasionally do not include all data recorded on drillers’ logs and field data sheets, but do include all information considered relevant to the design and construction of this report. No water was encountered during the drilling of any borings as noted in the boring logs. Fluctuations in the ground water level due to seasonal and climatic effects should be expected.

6. Laboratory Investigation

At the conclusion of the fieldwork, laboratory testing was conducted on 6 soil samples from Borings B-01 through B-011. Laboratory tests on the samples included gradation (AASHTO T-88), Atterburg limits (AASHTO T-89, T-90), moisture content (AASHTO T-265), soil classification (AASHTO T-145). Laboratory test results are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 - Results of Laboratory Testing

Boring

Sample

Sample Depth

(ft)

%-200

LL(1)

PI(2)

Classification(1)

Moisture Content(1)

B-01 J-1 1-3 70.8 31 10 A-4(6) 16.5 B-03 J-2 3-5 20.0 N/D N/P A-2-4(0) 6.8 B-04 J-2 3-5 22.0 20 N/P A-1-b 14.1 B-07 J-1 1-3 60.9 31 11 A-6(4) 13.3 B-08 J-2 3-5 48.5 21 N/P A-4(0) 11.5 B-11 J-2 3-5 27.4 N/D N/P A-2-4(0) 12.8

Note that (1) N/D denotes “Not Determined” and (2) N/P denotes “Non-Plastic” in Table 1 above.

7. Findings

The findings at the project site are summarized below. Refer to the boring logs in Appendix C and the laboratory data in Appendix D for more detailed information. Ground water was not encountered during any of the borings as noted in the boring logs. Fluctuations in the water level due to seasonal and climatic effects should be expected.

Pavement Condition

Based on the pavement condition survey conducted by EFLHD Pavement Section in November 2013, the most prevalent pavement distress type exhibited along Routes 10 and 11 was rutting and fatigue cracking.

Figure 1. Typical Fatigue Cracking and Rutting along Route 10

Figure 2. Typical Fatigue Cracking and Rutting along Route 11

Figure 3. Typical Fatigue Cracking in Sweetgum Picnic Area

Figure 4. Laurel Picnic Area – Ponding area along curb and gutter

Subsurface Condition

Borings B-01 through B-11 were taken along Park Central Road and Entrance Road. The existing HMA pavement thickness along these roads ranged from 3.5 to 8.0 inches with an average of 6.7 inches. Aggregate base course thickness ranged from 2.5 to 8.0 inches, with an average of 3.7 inches.

Borings P-01 through P-04 were conducted in the parking areas to record HMA pavement and aggregate base course thickness. The results are presented in Table 2 below.

Table 2 – Parking Area Existing Pavement Structure

Boring

Parking Area

HMA

thickness (in) Aggregate Base thickness (in)

P-01 Sweetgum Parking 3.6 7.0 P-02 Holly Parking 6.5 5.0 P-03 Park Headquarters 7.2 3.6 P-04 Park Police Parking 3.6 7.0

Brown silty sand (A-1-b to A-4(0)) was encountered in 4 borings below the aggregate base course. Based on laboratory testing of this silty sand material, water content ranged from

11.5 to 14.1% with an average of 12.8%, liquid limit ranged from 20 to 21%, with an average of 20.5%, and were determined to be non-plastic.

Brown sand (A-2-4(0)) was encountered in 3 borings below the aggregate base course.

Based on laboratory testing of this sand material, water content ranged from 6.8 to 12.8% with an average of 9.8%, and were determined to be non-plastic.

Brownish red to gray clay (A-6(4)) was encountered in 9 borings below the aggregate base course. Based on laboratory testing of this sand material, water content ranged from 13.3 to 16.5% with an average of 14.9%, liquid limit was 31%, and plasticity index ranged from 10 to 11% with an average of 10.5%.

III. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

1. Pavement Design

Flexible pavement design analyses were performed in accordance with 1993 AASHTO Pavement Design procedure using the DARWin (Version 3.01) Pavement Design System to determine the future structural number (SN) necessary for the proposed roadways. The flexible pavement design analysis and overlay design analysis were for a 25-year performance period. The design analysis to determine the 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs) for the roadway was performed using the Rigorous ESAL Calculation in DARWin and based upon average daily traffic of 416. Vehicle classifications included 88% passenger vehicles, 10% busses and RV’s with trailers, 1% heavy maintenance trucks, and 1% light truck vehicle volume for the project. The traffic growth rate of 2% was assumed for future traffic volume increases. The vehicle classification data and traffic volumes were interpreted and adjusted based on information provided by Highway Design. The effective roadbed soil resilient modulus (MR) was determined based on information obtained from the subsurface investigation. The average value of MR determined for the length of the project was 10,000 psi. Other parameters specified in the analysis included a reliability of 75 percent, an overall standard deviation of 0.49, and initial serviceability index of 4.2, and a terminal serviceability index of 2.0. The results of the analysis are presented in Appendix E.

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS

The following pavement recommendations are based on the existing conditions at the time of the field investigation in October 2011 and subsequent pavement condition survey in November 2013. The recommendations included here reference the FP-03, “Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects” (FP-03 Specifications).

1. Pavement Section

Based on field condition survey and subsurface investigation, minimum flexible pavement sections with a 25-year performance period for the project sites are provided in below.

Entrance Road and Park Central Road (NPS Routes 10 and 11)

Based on our field investigation, Routes 10 and 11 are exhibiting moderate to high severity rutting and fatigue cracking. The extent and severity of these distresses have increased steadily over the course of multiple condition surveys and site visits. As a result of these deteriorating conditions, we are providing the following recommendations.

Full-Depth Reclamation with Cement

The existing AC pavement and aggregate base course should be full-depth recycled to a depth of 6-inches with cement. Due to the variations in existing structure, contractor testing of the recycled material for optimal mix design, the depth of FDR may vary according to the CO. The recycled base should then be overlaid with 4-inches of AC pavement according to the minimum requirements laid out below in Table 3. The permissive specifications for Warm-mix Asphalt (WMA) and Safety Edge should also be included.

Table 3. Full-Depth Reclamation Recommendations (Routes 10 and 11)

Layer Minimum Thickness (in) Comments

AC Surface Course 1 ½

Superpave Asphalt Concrete Pavement (SACP), 0.3 to < 3 x 106 ESAL’s, 3/8”

Nominal Maximum Size Aggregate (NMSA), Type III smoothness

Asphalt Tack Coat --- AC Tack Coat per Section 412 of the

FP-03 Specifications AC Base Course 2 ½ SACP, 0.3 to 3 x 106 ESAL’s, ¾”

NMSA

Asphalt

Prime Coat --- AC Prime Coat as per Section 411 of the FP-03 Specifications

Full-Depth Recycled

(FDR) Base Course

6+ FDR Aggregate Base Course with

Cement Stabilization as per Section 304 of the FP-03 Specifications

The 25-year required structural number for routes 10 and 11 based on the anticipated traffic is 2.36. The design structural number for the typical section provided in Table 3 above is 2.76.

Additionally, several areas currently exhibiting moderate to high severity fatigue cracking and rutting are likely due to weak subgrade conditions (identified in Appendix B). It is recommended that these areas be proof-rolled prior to placement of the AC overlay. If proof-rolling indicates weak or unsuitable subgrade conditions these sections should be sub-excavated to a minimum depth of 6-inches, or more according to the CO. Sub-excavated areas should then be backfilled with unclassified borrow and covered with geotextile, Type

II-B, in order to provide additional support.

Parking Areas

The parking areas are in relatively good condition, with minor to moderate longitudinal and transverse cracking. As a result, we are recommending the existing AC pavement be milled to a depth of 1.5-inches and overlaid with AC pavement according to the minimum requirements laid out below in Table 4. Additionally, three areas within the Laurel Picnic Area will require the curb and gutter to be raised in order to provide positive drainage (see figure 4 above). We recommend that the areas around these sections receive a wedge and level course to match the curb and gutter once raised (areas identified in Appendix B spot repair locations).

Table 4. Parking Area Mill and Overlay Recommendations

Thickness (in)

Comments

AC Surface Course 1 ½ SACP, < 0.3 x 106 ESAL’s, 3/8”

NMSA, Type IV smoothness

Asphalt Tack Coat --- AC Tack Coat as per Section 412 of the FP-03 Specifications

Wedge and Level

Varies (As needed to correct drainage)

SACP, < 0.3 x 106 ESAL’s, 3/8”

NMSA

Prior to being overlaid, areas within Sweetgum and Laurel Picnic Areas provided in the spot repair locations in Appendix B will require spot reconstruction according to the minimum requirements laid out in Table 5 below.

Table 5. Spot Repair Recommendations (Parking Areas)

Thickness (in) Comments

AC Surface Course 1 ½ SACP, < 0.3 x 106 ESAL’s, 3/8”

NMSA, Type IV smoothness Asphalt Tack

Coat --- AC Tack Coat per Section 412 of the FP-03 Specifications

AC Base Course 2 ½ SACP, < 0.3 x 106 ESAL’s, ¾” NMSA

Asphalt Prime Coat --- AC Prime Coat as per Section 411 of the FP-03 Specifications

Aggregate Base Course 6

Base Aggregate, Grading C or D, as per Subsection 703.05(b) of the FP-03

Specifications

Bike Trail

Sections of the existing bike trail and adjacent parking area will require spot repairs, according to the minimum requirements provided above in Table 5. Additionally, sections being improved for a temporary construction entrance should be constructed with a minimum of 2-inches of HACP pavement according to Section 404 of the FP-03 Specifications over 4-inches of aggregate base course.

2. Earthwork

Soil Cover for Buried Structures: All proposed pipes and other proposed buried structures should have a minimum soil cover of 12 inches.

Subgrade Preparation: Prior to AC paving, areas exhibiting high severity rutting and fatigue cracking should be proof-rolled to identify weak or unsuitable subgrade materials. If unsuitable subgrade materials are encountered in isolated areas, sub-excavation of unsuitable materials is recommended to a minimum depth of 6-inches. The sub-excavated areas should then be backfilled with unclassified borrow, re-compacted to at least 95% of maximum density in accordance with the AASHTO T 180 Method D, and covered with geotextile, Type II-B.

Full-Depth Reclamation: After the addition of cement, spread the reclaimed base a minimum 1-foot beyond the proposed edge of pavement to improve edge support and provide safety edge support. Remove vegetation along shoulders prior to spreading the recycled base.

Aggregate Base Course: Immediately after subgrade preparation, aggregate base course should be placed and compacted to at least 95% of maximum density in accordance with the Section 301 of the FP-03 Specifications. Any additional material should be Base Aggregate, Grading C or D as per Section 703.05(b) of the FP-03 Specifications.

V. DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

The subsurface explorations and tests described in the section on Procedures and Results have been conducted in accordance with standard practices and procedures (except as specifically noted). The results of these explorations and tests represent conditions at the specific locations indicated. Subsurface and conditions between these locations may vary.

The Analysis and Conclusions section and the Recommendations section in this report include interpretations and recommendations developed by the Government in the process of preparing the design. These interpretations are not intended as a substitute for the personal investigation, independent interpretation, and judgment of the Contractor.

Prepared by:

Sean O’Brien Pavement Engineer

Reviewed by:

Bill Eshbaugh Pavement Team Leader

APPENDIX A – Project Location and Geological Maps

LOCATION MAP

Still Creek

N

SCALE IN FEET

0 1,000 2,000

A03

Replace Still Creek Culverts with Bridge

(RTE 0900)

Park Police Substation Parking

(RTE 0906)

Park Headquarters Parking Sweetgum Picnic Parking Areas (RTE 0907ZZ)

Sweetgum Picnic Loop (RTE 0200) &

(RTE 0011)

Begin Work Park Central Rd

(RTE 0010)

Sta 207+82

End Work Main Entrance Rd

(RTE 0010)

Sta 200+00

Begin Work Main Entrance Rd

Sta 1000+00

Begin Detour on Paved Bike Trail

Sta 121+17

End Work Park Central Rd (RTE 0011)

Sta 1032+20

Good Luck Road Bike Trail Parking (RTE 0905)

End Detour on Paved Bike Trail at

(Staging Area)

Laurel Picnic Area Parking Areas (RTE 0908ZZ)

Laurel Picnic Area (RTE 0201) &

(Staging Area)

(RTE 0903)

Dogwood Nature Trail Parking

(RTE 0902)

Holly Picnic Area

M

P R

O J E

C T

S g r e e (1

P r o j

D e v C

A D

D A -G

R E

E (1 lo c .d g n

T

IM

E

-A u g -2

1:

P M

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

REG STATE PROJECT SHEET NO.

NC MD PRA-GREE 11(1)

NPS

NO.NO.

PMIS

GREENBELT PARK

109709 151314

Source: United States Geological Survey (USGS), "Geologic Map of Massachusetts (2006)" Google Earth, 2013

TOTAL

SHEETS

1MD

FIGURE 2

GEOLOGIC MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

Kp: Potomac Group - Cretaceous Including Raritan and Patapsco Formations, Arundel Clay, and Patuxent Formation

Interbedded quartzose gravels; protoquartzitic to orthoquartzitic argillaceous sands; and white, dark gray, and multicolored silts and clays

NC

SHEET

NO. PROJECT

STATEREG

PRA-GREE 11(1)

Prince George's County, Maryland (2005) Source: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

CcC - Christiana-Downer Complex Typical profile (Chrisitiana) 0-6 inches: Silt Loam (A-4) 6-10 inches: Silt Loam, Loam (A-4) 10-21 inches: Silty Clay Loam, Silty Clay, Silt Loam (A-6, A-4, A-7-6) 21-49 inches: Silty Clay Loam, Clay, Silty Clay (A-6, A-7-6) 49-80 inches: Silty Clay Loam, Silty Clay, Silt Loam, Clay Loam (A-6, A-4, A-7-6)

Typical profile (Downer) 0-12 inches: Loamy Sand (A-2-4, A-3) 12-31 inches: Sandy Loam (A-4, A-2-4, A-3) 31-38 inches: Loamy Sand, Sand (A-1-b, A-2-4, A-4, A-3) 38-72 inches: Sand, Loamy Sand (A-1-b, A-2-4, A-3)

NC

SHEET

NO. PROJECT

STATEREG

PRA-GREE 11(1)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

1MD

FIGURE 3

SOIL SURVEY MAP EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

TOTAL

SHEETS

APPENDIX B – Pavement Condition Survey

Route Start Station End Station Distress Lane Location 10 202+80.00 203+25.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 10 204+00.00 206+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 10 206+80.00 207+20.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 1+00.00 2+00.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 2+50.00 2+85.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 3+15.00 3+30.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 4+40.00 4+80.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 9+60.00 9+90.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 9+95.00 10+15.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 10+10.00 10+70.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 11+00.00 12+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 18+00.00 19+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 19+20.00 19+40.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 19+55.00 19+70.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 26+00.00 27+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 28+00.00 29+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 29+00.00 30+00.00 Edge Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 30+00.00 31+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 37+00.00 38+00.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 38+00.00 38+70.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 38+90.00 39+90.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 40+50.00 41+60.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 44+00.00 45+00.00 Pothole SB Outside Half Lane 11 45+00.00 46+00.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 47+00.00 47+70.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 47+90.00 48+10.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 48+00.00 48+10.00 Pothole SB All 11 48+70.00 49+00.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 54+00.00 54+25.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 54+00.00 54+30.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 55+00.00 55+15.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 55+20.00 55+60.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 56+10.00 56+35.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 56+50.00 57+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 59+00.00 59+75.00 Fatigue Cracking NB & SB All 11 61+00.00 62+10.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 61+95.00 62+05.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 63+15.00 63+85.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 64+30.00 64+60.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 63+00.00 63+40.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 64+00.00 64+60.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 66+00.00 66+25.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 68+00.00 68+75.00 Fatigue Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 77+00.00 77+45.00 Fatigue Cracking NB & SB All 11 78+00.00 79+00.00 Edge Cracking NB Outside Half Lane 11 80+65.00 81+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 78+00.00 78+35.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 80+95.00 81+00.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 88+00.00 89+00.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 90+00.00 90+20.00 Fatigue Cracking SB All 11 91+85.00 92+00.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 95+00.00 95+40.00 Fatigue Cracking SB Outside Half Lane 11 119+40.00 120+00.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All 11 105+00.00 105+45.00 Fatigue Cracking NB All

Pavement Condition Survey

APPENDIX C – Boring Logs

J-1

J-2

0.3

0.6

5.0

1.7

1.6

3-6-8-11

5-12-18-13

3.5-inches AC PAVEMENT

3.5-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Stiff, brownish red CLAY (A-4(6)) (moist)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

0.0 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.6

2.0

3.0

5.0

1.3

1.3

2-7-17-10

3-4-6-7

6.5-inches AC PAVEMENT

Very stiff, reddish CLAY (dry)

Medium dense, brown SILTY SAND, some clay (dry)

Stiff, reddish brown CLAY (dry)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

0.25 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.6

0.9

3.0

5.0

1.6

1.7

6-10-7-7

3-4-4-4

7-inches AC PAVEMENT

3.5-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Very stiff, brown SANDY CLAY, some sand (moist to dry)

Loose, brown SAND (A-2-4(0)) (moist)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

0.5 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.7

1.0

5.0

1.3

2.0

5-8-6-5

3-6-9-19

8-inches AC PAVEMENT

3-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Stiff, brown SILTY SAND (A-1-b) (moist)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

0.75 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.7

1.0

3.0

5.0

1.3

1.4

3-4-4-4

0-0-3-3

8.5-inches AC PAVEMENT

3.5-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Medium to stiff, brown and gray SANDY CLAY (moist)

Soft, reddish brown CLAY (wet to moist)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

1.0 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.7

0.9

3.0

5.0

1.3

1.2

2-4-5-4

2-3-3-4

8-inches AC PAVEMENT

2.5-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Stiff, gray and red SANDY CLAY (moist)

Medium, gray and red SANDY CLAY (moist)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

1.25 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.5

1.1

5.0

1.3

1.2

4-6-5-5

2-3-6-7

5.5-inches AC PAVEMENT

8-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Stiff, brown SANDY CLAY (A-6(4)) (moist)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

1.5 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.5

0.9

3.0

5.0

1.5

1.8

5-5-11-8

5-7-10-10

5.5-inches AC PAVEMENT

5-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Stiff to very stiff, brown and orange SANDY CLAY (moist)

Very stiff, reddish brown SILTY SAND (A-4(0)) (moist to dry)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

1.75 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.5

0.8

3.0

5.0

1.5

1.0

8-11-10-9

3-3-3-3

5.5-inches AC PAVEMENT

3.5-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Very stiff, brown SANDY CLAY (moist)

Loose, brown SAND, trace of clay (moist)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

2.0 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.7

1.0

3.0

5.0

1.3 3-4-6-6

1-2-2-2

8.5-inches AC PAVEMENT

3-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Stiff, brown SANDY CLAY (moist)

No recovery

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

2.25 miles from end of route 11

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

0.6

1.0

3.0

5.0

1.4

1.6

7-11-8-6

1-1-1-3

7-inches AC PAVEMENT

5-inches AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

Medium dense, brown SILTY SAND, trace of clay (dry)

Very loose, brown SILTY SAND (A-2-4(0)), trace of clay (moist to wet)

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 5.0 FEET

(Blows / ft)

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th ft)

D ep th S ca le ft

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture T yp e

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

Standard Penetration Test Data

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

R ec

SAMPLE

GREE 11(1)

GREENBELT PARK

hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in

20 60 80

140 lb/auto 4 in

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 10/31/11 flight auger

10/31/11 Thormton Hutchins

Fair

Project Name:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

300 ft begining from route 10

Sheet: 1 of 1

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

No ground water was encountered during or after drilling began.

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/1 9/

APPENDIX D – Laboratory Test Results

SOIL DATA

INDEXLIMITLIMITCONTENTNO.

PLASTICITYLIQUIDPLASTICWATERDEPTHSAMPLE

NATURAL

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

(ft.)

AASHTO

PRA-GREE 11(1)

FHWA/EFLHD

A-4(6)10312116.51-3RB-1/J-1MP 0.0

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

A-2-4(0)NPNVNP6.83-5RB-3/J-2MP 0.5

A-1-bNP20NP14.13-5RB-4/J-2MP 0.75

A-6(4)11312013.31-3RB-7/J-1MP 1.50

A-4(0)NP21NP11.53-5RB-8/J-2MP 1.75

10 30 50 70 90 110

LIQUID LIMIT

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

PI

=L

L-

A-4 or A-2-4 A-5 or A-2-5

A-7-6

A-6 or A-2-6

A-7-5 or A-2-7

NO.

USCSDESCRIPTION

DEPTHSAMPLE

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

Particle Size Distribution Report

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

R

100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001200 GRAIN SIZE - mm

% + 3"

% GRAVEL

CRS. FINE

% SAND

CRS. MEDIUM FINE

% FINES

SILT CLAY

in in in

1- 1/ in in

3/ in

1/ in

3/ in

#4 #1

#2

#3

#4

#6

#1

#1

#2

0.0 0.0 2.6 4.5 3.2 18.9 70.8

(ft.)

PRA-GREE 11(1)

FHWA/EFLHD

MP 0.0 RB-1/J-1 1-3 Lean clay with sand CL

Particle Size Distribution Report

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

0.0 0.0 8.3 9.9 23.3 38.5 20.0

MP 0.5 RB-3/J-2 3-5 Silty sand SM

0.0 0.0 2.4 7.1 42.4 26.1 22.0

MP 0.75 RB-4/J-2 3-5 Silty sand SM

0.0 0.0 1.1 4.8 2.7 30.5 60.9

MP 1.50 RB-7/J-1 1-3 Sandy lean clay CL

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 50.3 48.5

MP 1.75 RB-8/J-2 3-5 Silty sand SM

INDEXLIMITLIMITCONTENTNO.

PLASTICITYLIQUIDPLASTICWATERDEPTHSAMPLE

NATURAL

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

(ft.)

AASHTO

PRA-GREE 11(1)

FHWA/EFLHD

A-2-4(0)NPNVNP12.83-5RB-11/J-2Route 10

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

10 30 50 70 90 110

LIQUID LIMIT

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

PI

=L

L-

A-4 or A-2-4 A-5 or A-2-5

A-7-6

A-6 or A-2-6

A-7-5 or A-2-7

NO.

USCSDESCRIPTION

DEPTHSAMPLE

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

Particle Size Distribution Report

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

R

100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001200 GRAIN SIZE - mm

% + 3"

% GRAVEL

CRS. FINE

% SAND

CRS. MEDIUM FINE

% FINES

SILT CLAY

in in in

1- 1/ in in

3/ in

1/ in

3/ in

#4 #1

#2

#3

#4

#6

#1

#1

#2

0.0 0.0 6.8 7.4 26.7 31.7 27.4

(ft.)

PRA-GREE 11(1)

FHWA/EFLHD

Route 10 RB-11/J-2 3-5 Silty sand SM

Particle Size Distribution Report

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

APPENDIX E – Pavement Design Analysis

1993 AASHTO Pavement Design

DARWin Pavement Design and Analysis System

A Proprietary AASHTOWare Computer Software Product

Flexible Structural Design Module

Route 11 - Park Central Road Full-Depth Reclamation with Cement

Flexible Structural Design

18-kip ESALs Over Initial Performance Period 366,315 Initial Serviceability 4.2 Terminal Serviceability 2 Reliability Level 75 % Overall Standard Deviation 0.49 Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus 10,000 psi Stage Construction 1

Calculated Design Structural Number 2.36 in

Rigorous ESAL Calculation

Performance Period (years) 25 Two-Way Traffic (ADT) 416 Number of Lanes in Design Direction 1 Percent of All Trucks in Design Lane 100 % Percent Trucks in Design Direction 60 %

Vehicle Class

Percent of

ADT

Annual

Growth

Average Initial Truck Factor

(ESALs/ Truck)

Annual % Growth in

Truck Factor

Accumulated 18-kip ESALs over Performance Period

1 88 2 0.0007 0 1,741 2 10 2 1.2 0 339,139 3 1 2 0.3 0 8,478 4 1 2 0.6 0 16,957

Total 100 - - - 366,315

Growth Simple

Total Calculated Cumulative ESALs 366,315

Specified Layer Design

Layer

Material Description

Struct Coef.

(Ai)

Drain Coef.

(Mi)

Thickness (Di)(in)

Width

(ft)

Calculated

SN (in) 1 AC Overlay 0.42 1 4 10 1.68 2 FDR with Cement 0.18 1 6 10 1.08

Total - - - 10.00 - 2.76