AASHTO Pavement Design (1)

Iain MacGregor

Technical Director Mott MacDonald

University of Leeds DAMP15

January 2015

(1) AASHTO Guide for Design Of Pavement Structures. American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, Washington, DC 1993

1
 Introduction to AASHTO
• AASHTO Pavement Design Method developed in the US
• AASHTO is: The American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials
• Its principles of structural number can be applied to many different material
types and situations
• The method can easily be applied to different environmental and climatic
conditions
• Many other methods use AASHTO as a base:
– Abu Dhabi
– Oman
– Afghanistan
– Indonesia
– Qatar

2
 Pavement Types Recap

• Flexible Pavement (to be covered in this lecture)

– Hot mix asphalt (HMA) pavements
– Called "flexible" since the total pavement structure bends (or flexes) to
accommodate traffic loads
– About 82.2% of paved U.S. roads use flexible pavement
– About 95.7% of paved U.S. roads are surfaced with Hot Mix Asphalt

• Rigid Pavement (for information)

– Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavements
– Called “rigid” since PCC’s high modulus of elasticity does not allow
them to flex appreciably
– About 6.5% of paved U.S. roads use rigid pavement

3
 Flexible Pavement

• Structure
– Surface course
– Base course
– Subbase course
– Subgrade

4
Flexible Pavement – Construction

5
 Rigid Pavement

• Structure
– Surface course
– Base course
– Subbase course
– Subgrade

6
 Rigid Pavement – Construction

Slipform

Fixed form

7
 History Of US Pavement Thickness Design

• Before 1940 - Rule of thumb, judgment and experience

• 1956 - Need for standardised method for US Interstate Highway System
• 1961 -- Completion of the AASHO road test - extensive empirical experiment using
actual materials, vehicles, and varying loading
• 1961 - interim guide for design of flexible pavement structures published
• 1986 - AASHTO interim guide for design of pavement structures published
• 1993 AASHTO guide for design of pavement structures published (the subject
presentation)

• Post 1993 – Continuing research and Statewide variations

8
 Basis of AASHTO Design

• Empirical experiments resulted in the establishment of

relationships between pavement life/serviceability and:
– Traffic load
– Environment
– Climate
– Materials used in the pavement
– Foundation characteristics

9
 Basis of AASHTO Design

• The AASHTO concept of Structural Number (SN) was

derived where:
– The combined parameters produce a thickness index for a layered
pavement which is equivalent to a design SN
– The thickness index is calculated as:

• SN = a1D1 + a2D2 + a3D3 or the sum of the SN for each layer

• Where an = material coefficient and Dn = thickness

10
 Elements Of Thickness Design

Traffic loading -
•Magnitude of the axle and wheel loads
•Volume and composition of the axle loads
•Tyre pressure and contact area

Climate/environment -- Major effects on pavement

structure and sub grade
•Magnitude of temperature and fluctuations loss of stability,
flexibility, and hardness
•Frost heave and freeze - thaw cycle damage
•Damage to stabilised material
•Sub grade soils - weakness when saturated
•Clay soils -- moisture-induced volume change

11
 Elements Of Thickness Design

Material characteristics
• Asphalt surface - strength or stability with repeated loads
• Granular base and sub base - gradation, shear strength
• Treated or stabilised layers - strength in flexion and compression
• Subgrade strength or stability, classification, repeated loads.

12
 Foundation conditions: California Bearing Ratio
(CBR) Test

• A method of determining the strength of materials, particularly soils.

• Soil is compacted in a mold and subject to a dropped weight of
known size and height.
• Penetration distance of weight is related to strength of soil and can
be measured and calibrated for compacted soils.
• CBR can be tested or verified on site using loading or penetration
tests

13
 Foundation conditions: Resilient Modulus

• Resilient modulus (Mr) is equivalent to an elastic modulus

• Soil is placed in a chamber and subjected to prescribed pressure
and repeated loading.
• The axial deformation and strain of the sample is measured
• Empirical correlations between a resilient modulus and other
properties such as the CBR are tabulated.
• For example: Mr psi = 1,500 CBR, and Mr MPa = 10.3 CBR

14
 Subgrade Resilient Modulus

Some Typical Values

Classification CBR MR (psi) Typical Description
Gravels, crushed stone and sandy
Good ≥ 10 20,000 soils. GW, GP, GM, SW, SP, SM soils
are often in this category.

Clayey gravel and clayey sand, fine

Fair 5–9 10,000 silt soils. GM, GC, SM, SC soils are
often in this category.

Fine silty sands, clays, silts, organic

Poor 3–5 5,000 soils. CL, CH, ML, MH, CM, OL, OH
soils are often in this category.

15
 Research For The AASHTO Pavement Design Method -- The
AASHO Road Test

• 49 States involvement
• Comprised a succession of pavement sections of varied design
• Bituminous concrete surface, crushed limestone base sand -
gravel sub base
• Test traffic of single and tandem axle vehicles
• Axle loads from 2000 lb to 3,000 lb single, and 24,000 lb to 48,000
lb tandem
• Other measurements of surface deflection vehicle speeds,
pressures of sub grade soil and temperature distribution in the
pavement layers.

16
 AASHTO Flexible Pavement Design Method

• Interim guide for the design of Rigid and Flexible pavements

• 1993, AASHTO guide for the design of pavement structures
• Design inputs include:
• Traffic, serviceability requirements, reliability, sub grade soil strength,
environmental effects, and material performance criteria
• These determine the structural number, combined structural capacity of the
pavement, and layer thicknesses.
• See references for more details of inputs and use of design chart to
determine design structural number (SN).

17
 Traffic Inputs

Total load applications due to all the mixed traffic within the design period are
converted to the 18 - Kip (18,000 lb) equivalent standard axle load (ESAL).
Abbreviated example:
Vehicle Type Veh. Vol Truck Factor (Load Products
Equivalency Factor)
Single unit truck:
•2-axle, 4 - tire 87,600 0.003 283
•2-axle, 6 - tire 23,600 0.21 4,965
3-axle or more 4,400 0.61 2,684
Tractor semi-trailers:
•4 – axle or less 2,100 0.62 1,302
•5 – axle or less 7,300 1.09 7,757
6-axle or more 50,200 1.23 61,476

Total ESAL for design 78,900

18
 Typical Load Equivalency Factors

6
5.11
5
ESALs per Vehicle

1.85
2
1.35
1
0.0007 0.10
0
Car Delivery Truck Loaded 18-Wheeler Loaded 40' Bus Loaded 60'
Articulated Bus

Notice that cars are insignificant and thus usually ignored

in pavement design.

19
 The Pavement Serviceability Concept

• A product of the AASHO road-test

• A systematic but subjective rating of the riding surface by individuals.
• Serviceability rating scale of 0 to 5
• 0 corresponds to very poor and five represents a very good rating.
• Serviceability index is a function of roughness, cracking, and rutting of the
surface
• Slope variance of the longitudinal profile, or longitudinal roughness
• Average initial pavement serviceability index (Po) was found to be 4.2 as
acceptable for flexible pavements on high speed roads.
• The terminal serviceability value of (Pt) of 2.5 was found to indicate the
onset of failure for adequate traffic service.

20
 Serviceability

• Initial serviceability index is a function of pavement construction

quality.
• 4.2 is a typical value for new flexible pavements.
• Terminal index of 2.5 is suggested by the AASHTO guide for
major highway pavements
• 2.0 terminal index suffices for other pavements.
• Estimates change in serviceability in the design
• Change in serviceability should also be included to account for
sub grade swelling and frost heave.

21
 Serviceability Concept

• Pavements degrade over

time due to
– Exposure to traffic
– Time
– Exposure to elements

• Varies for different materials

and different construction
methods

22
 Reliability

• Provides a level of assurance (R) that pavement sections will

survive the period for which they were designed.
• For a given reliability level, the reliability factor is a function of the
overall standard deviation - So, which accounts for standard
variations in materials, construction, traffic prediction and
pavement performance.
• Suggested Value 0.45.

23
 Reliability


 
Reliability = P [Y > X] PY  X    f x x   f y  y dy  dx
 x 
X = Probability distribution of stress Y = Probability distribution of strength
(e.g., from loading, environment, etc.) (variations in construction, material, etc.)
Probability

Stress/Strength
24
 Environmental Effects

• AASHTO Design equations were developed from the results of

the road tests in a two- year period – not long enough to be
accounted for in the test data

• Significant effects of moisture on clay, and frost heave of

subgrade soils on the performance should be estimated and
added to that due to traffic loads

25
 Effective Roadbed Resilient Modulus

• This is the combined effect of the subgrade resilient modulus

(MR) of all the seasonal moduli
• Worksheet in the design guide is divided into monthly 12 MRs
• Relative damage (ui) selected for each corresponding monthly
modulus, and averaged for the year
• Average ui related on a scale to give the EFFECTIVE ROADBED
RESILIENT MODULUS (MR)

26
 Determination Of Required Structural Number (SN)

•Follow nomograph to solve for Structural Number (SN). (or use a

spreadsheet)

•Inputs include:
•Estimated future traffic - W
•Reliability - R
•Overall standard deviation So
•Effective road bed soil resilient modulus - Mr
•Design serviceability index - (change in pavement serviceability
index (Δpsi).
•Read down to the SN axis to find example value of SN =5.0

27
The AASHTO Design Nomograph

28
 Selection of Pavement Thickness Design

• Thickness of layers must provide the required load carrying capacity

corresponding to the design structural number (SN) determined above as
follows:
• SN = a1D1 + a2D2 m2 + a3D3 m3

• ai = layer coefficient of layer I

• Di = thickness of layer (inches)
• mi = drainage modifying factor for layer i

• Layer coefficients, ai for each of the surface, base and subbase can be
obtained from charts relating specific materials to the ai values. Alternatively
can use knowledge of local materials

29
 Drainage Modifying Factor Mi

• Only untreated base and subbase materials are considered with regards to
strengths affected by moisture Coefficients dependant on quality of
drainage and percentage of time the pavement structure is saturated

• Quality of drainage is measured by the length of time for the water to be

removed from the layer

• Drainage characteristics are tabulated and are incorporated numerically into

the design process

30
 General Procedure For Selection Of Layer Thickness -- Summary

• Starting from the surface layer and working downwards,

progressively protecting the layer below:
• Di ≥ SN1/a1
• D2 ≥ (SN2 - SN1) / a2m2
• D2 ≥ (SN3 - SN1 – SN2) / a3m3
• In the actual computations, actual depths may be rounded and this
must be included in the calculations (see following example)

31
 Flexible Pavement Design And Information Sources

Sources of information:
• AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures. American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 1993

• Garber, Nicholas J., and Hoel, L., Traffic and Highway Engineering. West
Publishing Co., St Paul, USA 1988. (Contains worked example of flexible
pavement design, Ch. 18, using AASHTO guide).

• Wright, Paul. H. Highway Engineering , 7th Edition, Chapter 16. Wiley publishers,
New York 2004.

32
• AASHTO 1993 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN
EXAMPLES

33
• Example Problem
• A flexible pavement is to be designed in accordance with
the 1993 AASHTO guide procedure. Traffic, environmental,
reliability, serviceability have been specified and Mr values
obtained for each of the layers. Resulting from these, the
following values were obtained as inputs to the pavement
design procedure (i.e. the process of selecting the
thickness of the various layers of the pavement).

34
• SN1 (for the base layer) = 2.6,
• SN2 (for the subbase layer) = 3.8,
• SN3 (for the subgrade layer) = 4.4
• Layer coefficients, a1 = 0.44, a2 = 0.14, a3 = 0.10.
• Drainage coefficient for base and subbase layers (m2 and
m3) = 0.8

35
• Basic relationships:
• SN = a1 D1 + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3
• SN1 = a1 D1
• SN2 = a2D2m2
• SN3 = a3D3m3

36
 Design Procedure

• Procedure usually starts from the top (support for the

surface layer) and works downwards to the subbase. Note
the progressive adjustment of the SN values by deducting
the preceding SN value.
SN1
Surface, a1 D1

SN2
Base a2 D2

Subbase a3 SN3
D3

Subgrade

37
• Then:
• D1 ≥ SN1 / a1 = 2.6/4.9 = 5.9 in., use 6 in
• New SN1 = a1D1 = 0.44 x 6 = 2.64
• D2 ≥ (SN2 – SN1) / a2m2 = (3.8 - 2.64) / 0.1 x 0.8 = 10.36,
use 12 in.
• New SN2 - = a2D2m2 + SN1 = (0.1 x 12 x 0.8) + 2,46 =
3.98
• D3 = (SN3 – SN2) / a2m3 = (4.4 – 3.98) / (0.1 x 0.8) 5.25,
use 6 in.

38
• Summary
• The selected layers are 6 in surface, 12 in base, and 6 in
subbase. All of these conform with the minimum required
thicknesses specified for the highway concerned

• But….there is an easier way!!

• AASHTO Design Spreadsheet

39