13.

5
26

100

AASHTO Method

k=50pci

24

9000 pounds

22

..}

.~

"
o

a= 5.9 inchcs

20
18
150

16

14

200

12 -

5 10

250

-~

300

"

>

500

23

1000

25

2s

"

34

35

Deflcchon basin AREA. mches

FIGURE 13.21

Detcrmination o[ dynamick-,alue trom d 0 andAREA (1 in. = 25-4 mm, l \b =

4.45 N. I pci = 271.3 kN/m-'). (From the AASHTO Guidc for Design of Pavcn1cnt
Structures. Copvright 1993. American Associalion of Sta te Highway and
Transportation Officials. Washington, DC. Used by pcrmission.)

a = 5_9 inches

''<=O.IS
101n
~

5
~

K (pci)

.;'

!000

'2"4
;_;"

10'1

500
300
200

Deflcction basin i\REA. inches

FIGURE 13.22

Determination of PCC modulus Jron1 k-va!ue. AREA, and slab thickness. (I in.
25.4 mm. l !b = 4.45 l\. 1 psi = 6.9 kPa. l pci = 271.3 k:-1/nr'). (Fron1 the AASHTO
Guide for Design of Pavement Structures. Copyright ! 993. American Association of
Sta te Highway and Transportation ffici[l]S. Washington. DC. U sed by permis.~ion.)

639

640

Chapt er 13

Design of Overlays

cbart is the dynamic k-value, whereas tbe k-value to be used witb the AASHTO design
equation and chart is the static k-value. The following relationship may be used for the
conversion:
Static k-value

D ynamic k-value
2

(13.29)

Example 13.12:

Much as in example 9.4, determine the dyn amic k-value and E, by Figures 13.21
and 13.22.

Solution: In Example 9.4, d0 = 0.003 in. = 3 mil (0.076 mm) and AREA

= 31.0 in. (787

mm). From Fgure 13.21, k = 210 pci (57 MN/m3 ) , which is the same as Example 9.4(a). Wilh
AREA = 31.0 in. (787 mm) and k = 210 pci (57 MN/m3), from Figure 13.22, EcD 3 = 6 X 109
Since D = 10 in. (25 mm), E, = 6 x 109/103 = 6 x 106 psi (41 GPa), which checks wlh the
5.7 X 106 (39 GPa) obtainc<.1 in E xample 9.4(a).

R emaining Life after Fatigue D amage by Tratlic To compute the remain ing life, the
actual traffic in 18-kip ESAL the pavement has carried to date and the total traffic the
pavement could be expected to carry to failure, as indicated respectively by NP and N1.s
in Figure 13.15, must be determined first. NP may be estimated by the pavement design
equations or nomographs in Section 11.3 or 12.3. To be consistent with the AASHTO
Road Test aud the development of these equations, a failu re PSI equal to 1.5 anda reliability of 50 percent are recommended .The remaining life, RL in percent, can thcn be
computed by
RL

= 100(1 -

NP )
N1.5

(13.30)

With RL known, a condition factor, CF, can be obtained from Figure 13.23, and
the effe.c tive structural capacity can be calculated as
SCett

= CF

SC0

(13.31)

Example 13.13:

A 10-in. (254-mm) concrete pavement with an initial PSI of 4.5 has been subjectcd to 14.5
million 18-kip (80-kN) ESAL b efore being overlaid. G iven that k = 72 pci
(19.5 MN/m3), E, = 5 X 106 psi (34.5 GPa), Se = 650 psi (4.5 MPa), J = 3.2, and
Cd = 1.0, determine the effective structural capacity of the pavement by the remaining
life approach.

Solution: With NP = 14,500,000, it is now necessary to determine N1.s Tue data givcn in this
example are the same as those in Example 12.6, except that, for failure to occur, APSI =
4.5 - 1.5 = 3.0, instead of 1.7, and R = 50%, instead of 95 %. N1.s can be determincd from
Figure 12.17 by the following steps:

13.5 AASHTO Method

641

0.9

..:
o 0.8

ir:
e::

_g
;o 0.7
e::

0.6

0.5 '--~-'-~~'--~-L.~~.l..-~---'-~~-'--~-'-~~-'-~-'-~----1

100

90

80

70

50
40
30
60
Remaioiog Life, RL, pcrcent

20

10

FIGURE 13.23

Relatiooship betwccn condition factor and remaining !He. (From theAASHTO Guide for
Design of Pavement Structurcs. Copyright 1993.American Association of Sta te Higbway and
Transportation Officials, Washington. DC Used by permission.)

L
2.

3.
4.

Same as Examplc 12.6.

Starting at 74 on the match line in Hgure 12.l 7b, a linc is drawn tbrough APSI = 3.0
until it intersecls the vertical axis, tben turns horizontally until it intersects D = 10 in.
(254 mm), and fioaUy turns vertically until it intersccts the horizontal axis.
From the reliability scale with R = 50%, a line is drawn parallel and over the overall
standard deviation scale until it intersects the TL line.
The intersection of a line connecting the last two points. tbe one in step 2 and the
other in step 3, with thc ESAL sca!e gives N1.s = 28 millions.

A more accurate ESAL can be obtained from Eq. 12.21, or log Nt.5 = 7.35 log (10 +
l) - 0.06 + (4.22 - 0.32 X 1.5) log{[(650 X 1.)/(215.63 X 3.2)][(10)75 - l .132)/l(10)75 18.42/(5 X 106/72)25 ]} = 7.654 - 0.06 - 0.096 = 7.498 or Nu = 31,500,000. From Eq. 13.30,
RL = 100(1 - 14.5/31.5) = 0.54. From Figure 13.22, CF = 0.9. From Eq. 13.31, Derr =
0.9 X 10 = 9 in. (229 mm).

13.5.3 Future Structural Capacity Analysis

The major objective of futurc structural capacity analysis is to determine the total
structural capacity of a new pavement required to carry N load repetitions during thc
overlay design period, as shown by SC in Figure 13.15. In other words, this step is simply a new pavement dcsign for either a flexible or rigid pavement system bascd on the
existing subgrade or foundation conditions. Conscquent1y, the design procedures for

642

Chapter 13

Design of Overlays

new pavements, as discussed in Section 11.3 or 12.3, can be used. However, sorne design
factors, which may be slightly different from new construction, are discussed below.
Traffic Analysis The purpose of traffic analysis is to determine the 18-kip (80-kN)
ESALs expected over the design life of the overlay in the design Jane. The estimated
ESALs must be calculated by using the appropriate equivalent factors for flexible or
rigid pavements. Flexible pavement equivalent factors should be used if ali layers are
flexible with no any workable PCC layer underneath. Rigid pavement equivalent factors
should be used if the ovcrlay is PCC or if the existing pavement has a PCC layer that is
not subjected to break and seat or rubblized procedurcs befare overlay. This principie is
based on the predominant effect of PCC over AC. If there is a PCC layer in the existing
pavement, its effective structural capacity should be in terms of PCC thickness, D , so the
future structural capacity should also be in terms of D , so that the structural deficiency,
D - Deff can be determined. If AC is used for the overlay, this deficiency in P CC thickness can be converted to AC thickness by a conversion factor to be discussed later.
An approximate relationship exists between flexible pavement and rigid pavement
equivaJent factors. A factor of 0.67 can be used to converl rigid pavement ESALs to flexible pavement ESALs. For cxample, 15 million rigid pavement ESALs equal 10 million
ESALs. Similarly, a factor of 1.5 can be used to convert flexible pavement ESALs to rigid
pavement ESALs. Failure to use the correct type of ESALs will result in significant errors
in the overlay design. Methods for traffic computations are preseoted in Chapter 6.
Subgrade The methods used for new pavements to determine the effective resilient
modulus, MR, or the effective modulus of subgrade reaction, k, can also be used for
overlay design. However, if as-constructed soil data are used, their properties may have
changed since construction, due to changes in moisture content or other factors.
If NDT procedures are used, the methods for calculating MR or the k-value vary
with the types of ovcrlay and existing pavement as follows:

l. If both the overlay and the existing pavement are AC, use NDT for flexible pavements, as described in Section 13.5.2, to backcalculate MR by Eq.13.23.
2. l f the existing pavement is PCC or AC/PCC, regardless of whether thc overlay is
AC or PCC, use NDT for rigid pavements, as described in Section 13.5.2, to backcalculate dynamic k-value by Figure 13.21. The dynamic k-value should be divided
by 2 to obtain the static value for use in thickness design.
3. If the overlay is PCC and the existing pavement is AC or fractured PCC, use
NDT for flexible pavements, as described in Section 13.5.2, to backcalculate MR
by Eq. 13.23 and E by Figure 13.17. 1l1en, by considering EP as Esa and D as
Dsa. the dynamic k-value can be found from Figure 12.18.
Reliability An overlay may be designed for different levels of reliability, as described in
Section 11.3.1 for new pavements. However, reliability level has a large effect on overlay
thickness. Varyiog reliability leve! to determine SN or D between 65 to 99 percent may
yield a difference in overlay thickness of 6 in. (152 mm) or more. Based on field testing, it
appears that a design reliability leve! of 95 percent and an overall standard deviation of
0.49 for any type of AC overlay and of 0.39 for any type of PCC overlay give overlay thicknesses consistent with thosc recommended for most projects by state highway agencies.