AASHTO Vehicle Definitions

Axle The common axis of rotation of one or more wheels whether power-driven or freely rotating, and whether in one or
more segments, and regardless of the number of wheels carried thereon.

Axle Group An assemblage of two or more consecutive axles considered together in determining their combined load effect on a
bridge or pavement structure.

Automobile Any vehicles or combination designed and used exclusively for the transport of assembled highway vehicles.
Transporter

Bus A motor vehicle designed primarily for the transportation of persons rather than property and having a passenger-
carrying capacity of 10 or more persons, other than a taxicab constructed and designed for transporting persons for
commercial purposes.

Cargo The items or freight to be moved; including items placed on or in a vehicle, towed by a vehicle, or a vehicle itself.

Connecting An arrangement of parts interconnecting two or more consecutive axles to the frame of a vehicle in such a manner as
Mechanism to equalize the load between axles.

Dromedary Unit A load carrying compartment on a truck-tractor located between the cab and the fifth wheel.

Gross Weight The weight of a vehicle and/or combination of vehicles plus the weight of any load thereon.

Height The total vertical dimension of a vehicle above the ground surface including any load and load-holding device thereon.

Length The total longitudinal dimension of a single vehicle, a trailer, or a semi trailer. Length of a trailer or semi trailer is
measured from the front of the cargo-carrying unit to its rear, exclusive of all overhang, safety or energy efficiency
devices, including air conditioning units, air compressors, flexible fender extensions, splash and spray suppressant
devices, bolsters, mechanical fastening devices, and hydraulic lift gates.

Load A weight or quantity of anything resting upon something else regarded as its support.

Motor Vehicle A vehicle which is self-propelled or propelled by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires, but not
operating upon rails.

Operator Every person who drives or is in actual physical control of a motor vehicle upon a highway or who is exercising
control over or steering a vehicle being towed by a motor vehicle.
Owner A person, other than a lien-holder, having the property in or title to a vehicle, including a person entitled to the use and
possession of a vehicle subject to a security interest in another person, but excluding a lessee under a lease not
intended as security.

Pavement Structure The combination of subbase, base course, and surface course placed on an earth subgrade to support the traffic load
and distribute it to the roadbed.

Quadrum Axle Any four consecutive axles whose extreme centers are not more than 192 inches (16 ft or 4.9 m) apart and are
individually attached to or articulated from, or both, a common attachment to the vehicle including a connecting
mechanism designed to equalize the load between the axles.

Regular Operation The movement over highways of vehicles, vehicle combinations, and loads thereon, subject to the recommended
limitations contained in this guide governing maximum weights and dimensions for motor vehicles and loads thereon.

Scale Tolerance An allowable variation in the static weight of an axle load in accordance with, but not exceeding the precision of the
scale involved.

Semi trailer Every single vehicle without motive power designed for carrying property and so designed in conjunction and used
with a motor vehicle that some part of its own weight and that of its load rests or is carried by another vehicle and
having one or more load-carrying axles.

Single Axle An assembly of two or more wheels whose centers are in one transverse vertical plane or may be included between
two parallel transverse planes 40 inches (3.3 ft or 1.0 m) apart extending across the full width of the vehicle.

Special Permit A written authorization to move or operate on a highway a vehicle or vehicles with or without a load of size and/or
weight exceeding the limits prescribed for vehicles in regular operation.

Special Permit An individual, firm, partnership, corporation, or association making application for a special permit to transport a
Applicant vehicle, vehicles, and/or load which is oversize or overweight and under whose authority and responsibility such
vehicle or load is transported.

Steering Axle The axle or axles of a motor vehicle or combination of vehicles by which the same is guided or steered.

Stinger-Steered A truck-tractor semi trailer combination where the fifth wheel is located on a drop frame behind and below the drive
Automobile axle of the power unit. In this configuration, vehicles are carried behind or both behind and above the cab of the power
Transporter unit, as well as on the semi trailer.

Tandem Axle Any two axles whose centers are more than 40 inches (3.3 ft or 1.0 m) but not more than 96 inches (8 ft or 2.4 m) apart
and are individually attached to or articulated from, or both, a common attachment to the vehicle including a
connecting mechanism designed to equalize the load between axles.

Tire, Pneumatic A tire of rubber or other resilient material which depends upon compressed air for support of a load.
 Trailer Every single vehicle without motive power designed for carrying property wholly on its own structure, drawn by a
motor vehicle which carries no part of the weight and load of the trailer on its own wheels and having two or more
load carrying axles.

Traveled Way The portion of the roadway for the movement of vehicles, exclusive of shoulders and auxiliary lanes.

Tridum Axle Any three consecutive axles whose extreme centers are not more than 144 inches (12 ft or 3.7 m) apart, and are
individually attached to or articulated from, or both, a common attachment to the vehicle including a connecting
mechanism designed to equalize the load between axles.

Triple Saddle A combination of four truck-tractors where the front axle of second truck-tractor is mounted on the fifth wheel of the
Mount lead truck-tractor, the front axle of the third truck-tractor is mounted on the fifth wheel of the second truck-tractor, and
the front axle of the fourth truck-tractor is mounted on the fifth wheel of the third truck-tractor; and with the rear
wheels of the second, third, and fourth truck-tractors trailing on the ground behind the operating motor unit.

Truck A single unit motor vehicle used primarily for the transportation of property.

Truck Tractor A motor vehicle used primarily for drawing other vehicles and not so constructed as to carry a load other than a part of
the weight of the vehicle and load so drawn.

Turning Path The path of a designated point on a vehicle making a specified turn.

Turning Track The radial distance between the turning paths of the outside of the outer front tire and the outside of the rear tire which
Width is nearest the center of the turn.

Variable Load Axles which can be regulated by the driver of the vehicle. These axles are controlled by hydraulic and air suspension
Suspension Axles systems, mechanically, or by a combination of these methods.

Vehicle A device in, upon, or by which any person or property may be transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices
moved by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.

Vehicle An assembly of two or more vehicles coupled together for travel upon a highway.
Combination

Width The total outside transverse dimension of a vehicle including any load or load-holding devices thereon, but excluding
approved safety devices and tire bulge due to load.

California Bearing Ratio

The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test is a simple strength test that compares the bearing
capacity of a material with that of a well-graded crushed stone (thus, a high quality crushed stone
material should have a CBR @ 100%). It is primarily intended for, but not limited to, evaluating
the strength of cohesive materials having maximum particle sizes less than 19 mm (0.75 in.)
(AASHTO, 2000[1]). It was developed by the California Division of Highways around 1930 and
was subsequently adopted by numerous states, counties, U.S. federal agencies and
internationally. As a result, most agency and commercial geotechnical laboratories in the U.S.
are equipped to perform CBR tests.

The basic CBR test involves applying load to a small penetration piston at a rate of 1.3 mm
(0.05″) per minute and recording the total load at penetrations ranging from 0.64 mm (0.025 in.)
up to 7.62 mm (0.300 in.). Figure 1 is a sketch of a typical CBR sample.

Figure 1. CBR
Sample

Equation
Values obtained are inserted into the following equation to obtain a CBR value:
Typical Values
General Soil Type USC Soil Type CBR Range

Coarse-grained soils GW 40 - 80

GP 30 - 60

GM 20 - 60

GC 20 - 40

SW 20 - 40

SP 10 - 40

SM 10 - 40

SC 5 - 20

Fine-grained soils ML 15 or less

CL LL 15 or less

OL 5 or less

MH 10 or less
 General Soil Type USC Soil Type CBR Range

CH LL > 50% 15 or less

OH 5 or less

Standard Test Methods

 AASHTO T 193: The California Bearing Ratio
 ASTM D 1883: Bearing Ratio of Laboratory Compacted Soils

Footnotes (↵ returns to text)

1. Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of Sampling and Testing,
Twentieth Edition. American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials. Washington, D.C.↵

Flexible Pavement ESAL Equation

At first glance, this equation looks quite complex – it is.

Where: W equals axle applications inverse of equivalency factors (where W18 = number of 18,000 lb (80 kN) single axle
loads)

Lx equals axle load being evaluated (kips)

 L18 equals 18 (standard axle load in kips)

L2 equals code for axle configuration

1 = single axle
2 = tandem axle
3 = triple axle (added in the 1986 AASHTO Guide)
x = axle load equivalency factor being evaluated
s = code for standard axle = 1 (single axle)

G equals

a function of the ratio of loss in serviceability at time, t, to the potential loss taken at a
point where pt = 1.5

Pt equals

"terminal" serviceability index (point at which the pavement is

considered to be at the end of its useful life)

b equals function which determines the relationship between serviceability and axle load applications

SN equals structural number

Example Calculation for a Single Axle

 Assumptions: Single axle, 30,000 lb (133 kN), SN = 3, pt = 2.5

 Answer: (Table D.4, p. D-6, 1993 AASHTO Guide) = 7.9
 Calculations

where : W18 equals predicted number of 18,000 lb (80 kN) single axle load applications
 W30 equals predicted number of 30,000 lb (133 kN) single axle load applications

Lx equals L30 = 30

L2x equals 1 (single axle)

G equals serviceability loss factor

equals

b30 equals curve slope factor

equals

and G/b30 equals -0.2009/4.388 = -0.04578

b18 equals

G/b18 equals -0.2009/1.2204 = -0.1646

Thus
 and

Finally LEF equals

(same as contained in 1993 AASHTO Guide, Appendix D)

Example Calculation for a Tandem Axle

 Assumptions: Tandem axle, 40,000 lb (133 kN), SN = 5, pt = 2.5

 Answer: (Table D.5, p. D-7, 1993 AASHTO Guide) = 2.08
 Calculations

where : L40 equals 40 (tandem axle)

L18 equals 18 (single axle)

L2x equals 2 (tandem axle)

L2s equals 1 (single axle)

G equals serviceability loss factor

equals

b40 equals curve slope factor

 equals

and G/b40 equals -0.2009/0.53824 = -0.37325

b18 equals

G/b18 equals -0.2009/0.50006 = -0.40175

Thus

Finally LEF equals

(same as contained in 1993 AASHTO Guide nbsp;Appendix D)

Equivalent Single Axle Load

Although it is not too difficult to determine a wheel or an axle load for an individual vehicle, it
becomes quite complicated to determine the number and types of wheel/axle loads that a
particular pavement will be subject to over its design life. Furthermore, it is not the wheel load
but rather the damage to the pavement caused by the wheel load that is of primary concern. The
most common historical approach is to convert damage from wheel loads of various magnitudes
and repetitions (“mixed traffic”) to damage from an equivalent number of “standard” or
“equivalent” loads. The most commonly used equivalent load in the U.S. is the 18,000 lb (80 kN)
equivalent single axle load (normally designated ESAL). At the time of its development (early
1960s at the AASHO Road Test) it was much easier to use a single number to represent all traffic
loading in the somewhat complicated empirical equations used for predicting pavement life.

There are two standard U.S. ESAL equations (one each for flexible and rigid pavements) that are
derived from AASHO Road Test results. Both these equations involve the same basic format,
however the exponents are slightly different.
Load Equivalency Factors
The equation outputs are load equivalency factors (LEFs) or ESAL factors. This factor relates
various axle load combinations to the standard 80 kN (18,000 lbs) single axle load. It should be
noted that ESALs as calculated by the ESAL equations are dependent upon the pavement type
(flexible or rigid) and the pavement structure (structural number for flexible and slab depth for
rigid). As a rule-of-thumb, the 1993 AASHTO Design Guide, Part III, Chapter 5, Paragraph 5.2.3
recommends the use of a multiplier of 1.5 to convert flexible ESALs to rigid ESALs (or a
multiplier of 0.67 to convert rigid ESALs to flexible ESALs). Using load spectra (as proposed in
the 2002 Guide for the Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement Structures) will eliminate the
need for flexible-rigid ESAL conversions. Table 1 shows some typical LEFs for various axle-
load combinations.

Table 1. Some Typical Load Equivalency Factors

Axle Type (lbs) Axle Load Load Equivalency Factor (from AASHTO, 1993)

(kN) (lbs) Flexible Rigid

Single axle 8.9 2,000 0.0003 0.0002

44.5 10,000 0.118 0.082
62.3 14,000 0.399 0.341
80.0 18,000 1.000 1.000
89.0 20,000 1.4 1.57
133.4 30,000 7.9 8.28

Tandem axle 8.9 2,000 0.0001 0.0001

44.5 10,000 0.011 0.013
62.3 14,000 0.042 0.048
80.0 18,000 0.109 0.133
89.0 20,000 0.162 0.206
133.4 30,000 0.703 1.14
151.2 34,000 1.11 1.92
177.9 40,000 2.06 3.74
222.4 50,000 5.03 9.07

Assumptions

 Terminal serviceability index (pt) = 2.5

  Pavement structural number (SN) = 3.0 for flexible pavements
 Slab depth (D) = 9.0 inches for rigid pavements

Generalized Fourth Power Law

The AASHTO load equivalency equation is quite cumbersome and certainly not easy to
remember. Therefore, as a rule-of-thumb, the damage caused by a particular load is roughly
related to the load by a power of four (for reasonably strong pavement surfaces). For example,
given a flexible pavement with SN = 3.0 and pt = 2.5:

1. A 18,000 lb (80 kN) single axle, LEF =1.0

2. A 30,000 lb (133 kN) single axle, LEF = 7.9
3. Comparing the two, the ratio is: 7.9/1.0 = 7.9
4. Using the fourth power rule-of-thumb:

Thus, the two estimates are approximately equal.

LEF Example
Assume a logging truck has three axles:

 Truck tractor
o Steering axle (single axle) = 14,000 lb (62.2 kN)
o Drive axle (tandem axle) = 34,000 lb (151.1 kN)
 Trailer
o Pole trailer axle (tandem axle) = 30,000 lb (133.3 kN)

The total equivalent damage by this truck is (pt = 3.0, SN = 3):

Steering axle @ 14,000 lb equals 0.47 ESAL

Drive axle @ 34,000 lb equals 1.15 ESAL

 Pole axle @ 30,000 lb equals 0.79 ESAL

Total equals 2.41 ESAL

If a pavement is subjected to 100 of these trucks each day (in one direction) for 20 years (5 days
per week), the total ESAL for this truck would be:

(5 day/7 day)(365 days/year)(20 years)(100 trucks/day)(2.41 ESAL/truck) = 1,256,643 ESAL

General Observations Based On Load Equivalency Factors

1. The relationship between axle weight and inflicted pavement damage is not linear but
exponential. For instance, a 44.4 kN (10,000 lbs) single axle needs to be applied to a pavement
structure more than 12 timesto inflict the same damage caused by one repetition of an 80 kN
(18,000 lbs) single axle. Similarly, a 97.8 kN (22,000 lbs) single axle needs to be repeated less
than half the number of times of an 80 kN (18,000 lbs) single axle to have an equivalent effect.
o An 80 kN (18,000 lbs) single axle does over 3,000 times more damage to a pavement
than an 8.9 kN (2,000 lbs) single axle (1.000/0.0003 ˜ 3,333).
o A 133.3 kN (30,000 lbs) single axle does about 67 times more damage than a 44.4 kN
(10,000 lbs) single axle (7.9/0.118 ˜ 67).
o A 133.3 kN (30,000 lb) single axle does about 11 times more damage than a 133.3 kN
(30,000 lb) tandem axle (7.9/0.703 ˜ 11).
o Heavy trucks and buses are responsible for a majority of pavement damage. Considering
that a typical automobile weighs between 2,000 and 7,000 lbs (curb weight), even a fully
loaded large passenger van will only generate about 0.003 ESALs while a fully loaded
tractor-semi trailer can generate up to about 3 ESALs (depending upon pavement type,
structure and terminal serviceability).
2. Determining the LEF for each axle load combination on a particular roadway is possible through
the use of weigh-in-motion equipment. However, typically this type of detailed information is not
available for design. Therefore, many agencies average their LEFs over the whole state or over
different regions within the state. They then use a standard “truck factor” for design which is
simply the average number of ESALs per truck. Thus, an ESAL determination would involved
counting the number of trucks and multiplying by the truck factor.
o This method allows for ESAL estimations without detailed traffic measurements, which
is often appropriate for low volume roads and frequently must be used for lack of a better
alternative for high volume roads.
o When using this method, there is no guarantee that the assumed truck factor is an
accurate representation of the trucks encountered on the particular roadway in question.
Estimating ESALs
A basic element in pavement design is estimating the ESALs a specific pavement will encounter
over its design life. This helps determine the pavement structural design (as well as
the HMA mix design in the case of Superpave). This is done by forecasting the traffic the
pavement will be subjected to over its design life then converting the traffic to a specific number
of ESALs based on its makeup. A typical ESAL estimate consists of:

1. Traffic count. A traffic count is used as a starting point for ESAL estimation. Most urban areas
have some amount of historical traffic count records. If not, simple traffic tube counts are
relatively inexpensive and quick. In some cases, designers may have to use extremely
approximate estimates if no count data can be obtained.
2. A count or estimate of the number of heavy vehicles. This usually requires some sort of
vehicle classification within the traffic count. The simplest classifications divide vehicles into two
categories: (1) heavy trucks and (2) others. Other, more elaborate schemes can also be used such
as the FHWA’s vehicle classification.
3. An estimated traffic (and heavy vehicle) growth rate over the design life of the pavement. A
growth rate estimate is required to convert a single year traffic count into the total traffic
experienced over the pavement design life. Typically, multiplying the original traffic count by the
pavement design life (in years) will grossly underestimate total ESALs. For example, Interstate 5
at mile post 176.35 (near Shoreline, Washington) has experienced a growth from about 200,000
ESALs per year in 1965 (original construction) to about 1,000,000 ESALs per year in 1994.
Thus, over a 30 year period, the ESALs per year have increased by a factor of five or an annual
growth rate of about six percent.
4. Select appropriate LEFs to convert truck traffic to ESALs. Different regions may experience
different types of loads. For instance, a particular area may experience a high number of trucks
but they may be mostly empty thus lowering their LEF. For instance, the statewide LEF for
Washington State is about 1.028 ESALs/truck. However, this may be drastically different from
local LEFs.
5. An ESAL estimate. An ESAL estimate can be made based on the preceding steps. Depending
upon circumstances these estimates may vary widely. Figure 1 shows an example of a pavement
that was built for an estimated ESAL loading but is experiencing a much higher loading due to a
marked increase in bus traffic.
 Figure Figure
1. Resulting damage from a marked increase in ESALs. 2. Likely cause of increased ESALs: increased bus traffic.

Temperature Variations
Extreme temperature variations can causes severe pavement damage due to expansion,
contraction and (in the case of rigid pavements) slab curling. Additionally, asphalt binder
rheologyvaries with temperature. Therefore, estimated temperature extremes and their effects are
a primary consideration. For flexible pavements, older asphalt binder grading systems did not
directly account for temperature effects and thus various empirical systems and thumb-rules were
developed. The Superpave PG binder grading system corrects this deficiency by
grading asphalt binder based on its performance in relation to temperature.

Expansion and Contraction

Pavements, like all other materials, will expand as they rise in temperature and contract as they
fall in temperature. Small amounts of expansion and contraction are typically accommodated
without excessive damage, however extreme temperature variations can lead to catastrophic
failures. Flexible and rigid pavements can suffer large transverse cracks as a result of excessive
contraction in cold weather. Rigid pavements are also prone to slab buckling as a result of
excessive expansion in hot weather (Figures 1 and 2).

Figure 2.
Thermal crack.
Figure 1. PCC
pavement blowup.

Slab Curling (Rigid Pavements)

Differences in temperature between the top and bottom surfaces of a PCC slab will cause the slab
to curl. The weight of the slab and its contact with the subbase restrict its movement, thus,
stresses are created.

In 1935, measurements reported by Teller and Southerland of the Bureau of Public Roads
showed that the maximum temperature differential (hence, maximum warping) is much larger
during the day than during the night. Further, during the day, the upper surface of the slab is at a
higher temperature than the bottom resulting in tensile stresses at the bottom of the slab.

Resilient Modulus
The Resilient Modulus (MR) is a measure of subgrade material stiffness. A material’s resilient
modulus is actually an estimate of its modulus of elasticity (E). While the modulus of
elasticity is stress divided by strain for a slowly applied load, resilient modulus is stress divided
by strain for rapidly applied loads – like those experienced by pavements.

Resilient modulus is determined using the triaxial test. The test applies a repeated axial cyclic
stress of fixed magnitude, load duration and cycle duration to a cylindrical test specimen. While
the specimen is subjected to this dynamic cyclic stress, it is also subjected to a static confining
stress provided by a triaxial pressure chamber. It is essentially a cyclic version of a triaxial
compression test; the cyclic load application is thought to more accurately simulate actual traffic
loading.
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction
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 (Figure
1).

Figure 1. Modulus
of subgrade reaction (k).

The reactive pressure to resist a load is thus proportional to the spring deflection (which is a
representation of slab deflection) and k (Figure 2):
 Figure 2. Relation of load,
deflection and modulus of subgrade reaction (k).

The value of k is in terms of MPa/m (pounds per square inch per inch of deflection, or pounds
per cubic inch – pci) and ranges from about 13.5 MPa/m (50 pci) for weak support, to over 270
MPa/m (1000 pci) for strong support. Typically, the modulus of subgrade reaction is estimated
from other strength/stiffness tests, however, in situ values can be measured using the plate
bearing test.

Loads
One of the primary functions of a pavement is load distribution. Therefore, in order to adequately
design a pavement something must be known about the expected loads it will encounter. Loads,
the vehicle forces exerted on the pavement (e.g., by trucks, heavy machinery, airplanes), can be
characterized by the following parameters:

 Tire loads
 Axle and tire configurations
 Repetition of loads
 Distribution of traffic across the pavement
 Vehicle speed
 Figure 1: H-1 during rush hour Figure 2: Buses at Ala Moana

Loads, along with the environment, damage pavement over time. The simplest pavement
structural model asserts that each individual load inflicts a certain amount of unrecoverable
damage. This damage is cumulative over the life of the pavement and when it reaches some
maximum value the pavement is considered to have reached the end of its useful service life.

Therefore, pavement structural design requires a quantification of all expected loads a pavement
will encounter over its design life. This quantification is usually done in one of two ways:

1. Equivalent single axle loads (ESALs). This approach converts wheel loads of various
magnitudes and repetitions (“mixed traffic”) to an equivalent number of “standard” or
“equivalent” loads.
2. Load spectra. This approach characterizes loads directly by number of axles, configuration and
weight. It does not involve conversion to equivalent values. Structural design calculations using
load spectra are generally more complex than those using ESALs.

Both approaches use the same type and quality of data but the load spectra approach has the
potential to be more accurate in its load characterization.

Tire Loads
Tire loads are the fundamental loads at the actual tire-pavement contact points. For most
pavement analyses, it is assumed that the tire load is uniformly applied over a circular area. Also,
it is generally assumed that tire inflation and contact pressures are the same (this is not exactly
true, but adequate for approximations). The equation below relates the radius of tire contact to
tire inflation pressure and the total tire load:
States generally limit the allowable load per inch width of tire. Based on a slightly dated survey
(Sharma, Hallin and Mahoney, 1983[1]), this tire load limitation varies from a high of 140 N/mm
(800 lbs/inch) to a low of 79 N/mm (450 lbs/inch).

Figure 3. FHWA Class 9 five-axle tractor semi

trailer (18 tires total). A typical tire load is 18.9 kN (4,250 lbs) with an inflation pressure of 689 kPa (100
psi.)

Axle and Tire Configurations

While the tire contact pressure and area is of vital concern in pavement performance, the number
of contact points per vehicle and their spacing is also critical. As tire loads get closer together
their influence areas on the pavement begin to overlap, at which point the design characteristic of
concern is no longer the single isolated tire load but rather the combined effect of all the
interacting tire loads. Therefore, axle and tire arrangements are quite important.

Descriptions
Tire-axle combinations are typically described as (Figure 4):

 Single axle single tire(truck steering axles, etc.)

 Single axle dual tires
  Tandem axle single tires (Figure 5)
 Tandem axle dual tires

Figure 4. Tire-axle
combinations (from Mahoney, 1984).

Figure 5. Tandem drive axle

on a tractor frame during manufacturing.
Typical Axle Load Limits
Federal and State laws establish maximum axle and gross vehicle weights to limit pavement
damage. The range of weight limits in the U.S. vary a bit based on various Federal and State
laws. Figure 6 shows the range of maximum limits for single axle, tandem axle and gross vehicle
weight (GVW) established by the states and the FHWA.

Figure 6. Range of
allowable axle and truck weights in the U.S. (based on data from USDOT, 2000).

Although each state and the FHWA have established maximum axle-tire load combinations,
there are other restrictions as well. One of the most common is the FHWA bridge
formula (sometimes called the Federal Bridge Formula B).

Repetition of Wheel Loads

Although it is not too difficult to determine the wheel and axle loads for an individual vehicle, it
becomes quite complicated to determine the number and types of wheel/axle loads that a
particular pavement will be subject to over its entire design life. Furthermore, it is not the wheel
load but rather the damage to the pavement caused by the wheel load that is of primary
concern.There are currently two basic methods for characterizing wheel load repetitions:

1. Equivalent single axle load (ESAL). Based on AASHO Road Test results, the most common
approach is to convert wheel loads of various magnitudes and repetitions (“mixed traffic”) to an
 equivalent number of “standard” or “equivalent” loads. The most commonly used equivalent load
in the U.S. is the 80 kN (18,000 lbs) equivalent single axle load (normally designated ESAL).
2. Load spectra.The 2002 Guide for the Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement
Structures(NCHRP 1-37A) essentially does away with the ESAL and determines loading directly
from axle configurations and weights. This is a more precise characterization of traffic but relies
on the same input data used to calculate ESALs. typical load spectrum input would be in the form
of a table that shows the relative axle weight frequencies for each common axle combination (e.g.
single axle, tandem axle, tridem axle, quad axle) over a given time period(Figure 7). Often, load
spectra data can be obtained from weigh-in-motion stations.

Figure 7. Example
load spectra input screen from NCHRP 1-37A.

Typically, designers must not only calculate ESALs or load spectra for various vehicles but also
must forecast the expected number of ESALs or load spectra a pavement will encounter over its
entire design life. This information then helps determine the structural design. Highway design in
most states is based on the ESAL traffic input anticipated over a future 10 to 50 year period.

Traffic Distribution
Along with load type and repetitions, the load distributions across a particular pavement must be
estimated. For instance, on a 6-lane interstate highway (3 lanes in each direction) the total
number of loads is probably not distributed exactly equally in both directions. Often one
direction carries more loads than the other. Furthermore, within that one direction, not all lanes
carry the same loading. Typically, the outer most lane carries the most trucks and therefore is
subjected to the heaviest loading. Therefore, pavement structural design should account for these
types of unequal load distribution. Typically, this is accounted for by selecting a “design lane”
for a particular pavement. The loads expected in the design lane are either (1) directly counted or
(2) calculated from the cumulative two-direction loads by applying factors for directional
distribution and lane distribution. The 1993 AASHTO Guide offers the following basic equation:

Vehicle Speed
Although current design practices do not necessarily account for vehicle speed, it does influence
pavement loading. In general, slower speeds and stop conditions allow a particular load to be
applied to a given pavement area for a longer period of time resulting in greater damage.
For HMA pavements this behavior is sometimes evident at bus stops (where heavy buses stop
and sit while loading/unloading passengers) and intersection approaches (where traffic stops and
waits to pass through the intersection) when mix design or structural design have been
inadequate. In HMA pavement design, Superpave accounts for vehicle speed indirectly by
applying a design pavement temperature adjustment for slow-moving or stopped vehicles.
The Equivalent Single Axle Load
Although it is not too difficult to determine a wheel or an axle load for an individual vehicle, it
becomes quite complicated to determine the number and types of wheel/axle loads that a
particular pavement will be subject to over its design life. Furthermore, it is not the wheel load
but rather the damage to the pavement caused by the wheel load that is of primary concern. The
most common historical approach is to convert damage from wheel loads of various magnitudes
and repetitions (“mixed traffic”) to damage from an equivalent number of “standard” or
“equivalent” loads. The most commonly used equivalent load in the U.S. is the 18,000 lb (80 kN)
equivalent single axle load (normally designated ESAL). At the time of its development (early
1960s at the AASHO Road Test) it was much easier to use a single number to represent all traffic
loading in the somewhat complicated empirical equations used for predicting pavement life.

Load Equivalency
Using the ESAL method, damage from all loads (including multi-axle loads) are converted to
damage from an equivalent number of 18,000 lb. single axle loads, which is then used for design.
A “load equivalency factor” represents the equivalent number of ESALs for the given weight-
axle combination. The equation used to determine load equivalency can be quite complicated. As
a rule-of-thumb, the load equivalency of a particular load (and also the pavement damage
imparted by a particular load) is roughly related to the load by a power of four (for reasonably
strong pavement surfaces). For example, a 36,000 lb. single axle load will cause about 16 times
the damage as an 18,000 lb. single axle load.

Table 1 shows some typical load equivalencies (note that spreading a load out over two closely
spaced axles reduces the number of ESALs). Figure 8, using some approximations, shows some
general vehicle load equivalencies – note that buses tend

Load Number of ESALs

18,000 lb. single axle 1.000

2,000 lb. single axle 0.0003

30,000 lb. single axle 7.9

18,000 lb. tandem axle 0.109

 Load Number of ESALs

40,000 lb. tandem axle 2.06

Figure 8: Some
typical Load Equivalency Factors

 Traffic Index (TI). The traffic index is associated with the California method of pavement
structural design. Essentially, it has evolved in to a way of expressing ESALs as a single number
or index (see Figure 9).
 Figure 9: Traffic
Index vs. ESALs

Load Spectra
The 2002 Guide for the Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement Structures (NCHRP 1-37A)
has gone away from the ESAL approach and adopted a load spectra approach. In essence, the
load spectra approach uses the same traffic data that the ESAL approach uses only it does not
convert the loads into ESALs – it maintains the data by axle configuration and weight. This
information can then be used with a series of mechanistic-empirical equations to develop a
pavement structural design. Some key advantages of the load spectra approach are:


o
1. It is compatible with the FHWA’s Traffic Monitoring Guide (TMG) and thus
many agencies are already collecting the appropriate data.
2. It offers a hierarchical approach to traffic data input depending upon the users
needs and resources. There are three levels of potential input:
 Level 1 Inputs – Use of volume/classification and axle load spectra data
directly related to the project.
 Level 2 Inputs – Use of regional axle load spectra data and project-
related volume/classification data.
 Level 3 Inputs – Use of regional or default classification and axle load
spectra data.
3. It already includes information on traffic distribution including directional, lane
and temporal distribution (if needed) as well as traffic growth rates.
Footnotes (↵ returns to text)

1. Evaluation of Present Legislation and Regulations on Tire Sizes, Configurations and Load
Limits. Research Report WA-RD 59.1, Washington State Department of
Transportation. Olympia, WA.↵

Environment
A pavement must be able to function within the environment in which it is built. The
environment can vary greatly across the globe at any one time and it can also vary greatly across
time at any one place. Environmental variations can have a significant impact on pavement
materials and the underlying subgrade, which in turn can drastically affect pavement
performance. The key environmental parameters of concern are typically temperature, moisture,
and frost action.

Temperature
Temperature acts on pavements in two principal ways. First, temperature extremes can
affect asphalt binder rheology. Second, temperature variations can cause pavement to expand and
contract.

Temperature Extremes
Asphalt binder rheology (deformation and flow characteristics) varies with temperature.
Therefore, estimated temperature extremes and their effects are a primary consideration when
selecting an appropriate asphalt binder. Older asphalt binder grading systems did not directly
account for temperature effects and thus various empirical systems and thumb-rules were
developed. The Superpave PG binder grading system corrects this deficiency by grading asphalt
binder based on its performance in relation to temperature.

Expansion and Contraction

Pavements, like all other materials, will expand as they rise in temperature and contract as the
fall in temperature. Small amounts of expansion and contraction are typically accommodated
without excessive damage, however extreme temperature variations can lead to catastrophic
failures. Flexible pavements in colder areas on the mainland can suffer transverse cracks as a
result of excessive contraction in cold weather.
 Figure 1: Cracks From Figure 2: Cracks From
Excessive Pavement Contraction Excessive Pavement Contraction

Moisture
Moisture (in the form of accumulated water or rainfall) can affect pavement design and
construction as well as basic driving conditions. Specific issues with moisture are:

 Design. Certain types of soils can be highly expansive when wet. Structural design must account
for this expansiveness.
 Construction.
o The subgrade should be compacted at an optimal moisture content. Excessive rainfall can
raise subgrade moisture content well beyond this value and make it virtually impossible
to compact.
o HMA should not be placed in wet conditions because excessive water may damage the
hot, fresh HMA by cooling it too quickly or getting into the mix and causing later
stripping problems.
 Driving Conditions. Rainfall reduces skid resistance and can cause hydroplaning in severely
rutted areas.

Frost Action
Frost action, which can be quite detrimental to pavements because of its effect on the underlying
subgrade, can be divided into “frost heave” and “thaw weakening”. “Frost heave” is an upward
movement of the subgrade resulting from the expansion of accumulated soil moisture as it
freezes, while “thaw weakening” is a weakened subgrade condition resulting from soil saturation
as ice within the soil melts.
Frost Heave
Frost heaving of soil is caused by crystallization of ice within the larger soil voids and usually a
subsequent extension of this ice to form continuous ice lenses, layers, veins, or other ice masses.
As depicted in Figure 3, An ice lens grows and thickens in the direction of heat transfer until the
water supply is depleted or until freezing conditions at the freezing interface no longer support
further crystallization. As the ice lens grows, the overlying soil and pavement will “heave” up
potentially resulting in a rough, cracked pavement (see Figure 4).

Frost heave occurs primarily in soils containing fine particles (often termed “frost susceptible”
soils), while clean sands and gravels (small amounts of fine particles) are non-frost susceptible
(NFS). Thus, the degree of frost susceptibility is mainly a function of the percentage of fine
particles within the soil. Many agencies classify materials as being frost susceptible if 10 percent
or more passes a No. 200 sieve or 3 percent or more passes a No. 635 sieve.

Figure 3 : Formation of
Ice Lenses in a Pavement Structure
 Figure 4: Frost Heave

Pavement Note: the Casagrande Criterion

In 1932, Dr. Arthur Casagrande proposed the following widely known rule-of-thumb criterion
for identifying potentially frost susceptible soils:

“Under natural freezing conditions and with sufficient water supply one should expect
considerable ice segregation in non-uniform soils containing more than 3% of grains smaller
than 0.02 mm, and in very uniform soils containing more than 10 percent smaller than 0.02 mm.
No ice segregation was observed in soils containing less than 1 percent of grains smaller than
0.02 mm, even if the groundwater level is as high as the frost line.”

Note: 0.02 mm = No. 635 sieve

Application of the Casagrande criterion requires a hydrometer test of a soil suspension (in water)
to determine the distribution of particles passing the #200 sieve and to compute the percentage of
particles finer than 0.02 mm.

Thaw Weakening
Thawing weakening occurs when the ice contained within the subgrade melts. As the ice melts
and turns to liquid it cannot drain out of the soil fast enough and thus the subgrade becomes
substantially weaker (less stiff) and loses bearing capacity. Therefore, loading that would not
normally damage a given pavement may cause significant damage during spring thaw.

Thawing can proceed from the top downward, or from the bottom upward, or both. How this
occurs depends mainly on the pavement surface temperature. During a sudden spring thaw,
melting will proceed almost entirely from the surface downward. This type of thawing leads to
extremely poor drainage conditions. The frozen soil beneath the thawed layer can trap the water
released by the melting ice lenses so that lateral and surface drainage are the only paths the water
can take.
Mitigating Frost Action
Frost action mitigating generally involves structural design considerations as well as other
techniques applied to the base and subgrade to limit its effects. The basic methods used can be
broadly categorized into the following techniques:

Frost Heave
 Limit the depth of frost into the subgrade soils. This is typically accomplished by specifying the
depth of pavement to be some minimum percentage of the frost depth. By extending the
pavement section well into the frost depth, the depth of frost-susceptible subgrade under the
pavement (between the bottom of the pavement structure and frost depth) is reduced. The
assumption is that a reduced depth of soil under frost action will cause correspondingly less
damage.
 Removing and replacing frost-susceptible subgrade. Ideally the subgrade will be removed at least
down to the typical frost depth. Removing frost-susceptible soils removes frost action.
 Providing a capillary break. By breaking the capillary flow path, frost action will be less severe
because frost heaving requires substantially more water than is naturally available in the soil
pores.

Thaw Weakening
 Design the pavement structure based on reduced subgrade support. This method simply increases
the pavement thickness to account for the damage and loss of support caused by frost action.
 Restrict pavement loading during thaw conditions. Permanent pavement damage can be limited
by limiting pavement loading while the subgrade support is weak. Typically, a load reduction in
the range of 40 to 50 percent should accommodate a wide range of pavement conditions.

Drainage
Proper drainage is important to ensure a high quality long lived pavement; moisture
accumulation in any pavement structural layer can cause problems. Moisture in
the subgrade and aggregate base layer can weaken these materials by increasing pore pressure
and reducing the materials’ resistance to shear. Additionally, some soils expand when moist,
causing differential heaving (the roadway heaves up as the underlying soil expands). Moisture in
the HMA layers can cause stripping because it, instead of the asphalt binder, will adhere
to aggregate particles.
 Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Pavement Drainage in Action
Stagnant Ditch

Moisture sources are typically rainwater, runoff and high groundwater. These sources are
prevented from entering the pavement structure or accumulating in the subgrade through surface
drainage and subsurface drainage. Usually, it is more cost effective and less risky to prevent
moisture entry and accumulation using surface drainage than to remove moisture using
subsurface drainage.

Surface Drainage
Surface drainage is concerned with removing all water that is present on the pavement surface,
shoulder surface or any other surface from which it may flow onto the pavement. If not
systematically removed, this water can accumulate underneath and weaken the pavement
structure. There are three primary means used to prevent water infiltration and accumulation:

 Impermeable HMA. HMA tends to be impermeable below about 8 percent air voids, therefore
proper compaction practices should be followed to ensure an impermeable pavement. Also, minor
cracks in the HMA should be promptly sealed.
 Slope. The pavement section should be sloped to allow rainwater to sheet flow quickly to the
edge where it is typically collected in a curb and gutter system or a roadside ditch. A generally
accepted standard is a 2 percent cross slope.
 Grade. The curb and gutter or roadside ditch must be properly graded to allow flow to central
collection points such as catch basins or detention ponds. A generally accepted standard is a grade
of 0.5 percent or more although lesser grades have been used effectively.

Subsurface Drainage
Subsurface drainage is concerned with removing water that percolates through or is contained in
the underlying subgrade. This water, typically the result of a high water table or exceptionally
wet weather, can accumulate under the pavement structure by two chief means:
  Gravity flow. Water from surrounding areas can be absorbed by the soil then flow by gravity to
areas underneath the pavement structure. In pavement with high air voids (above 8 – 9 percent),
water can percolate down through the pavement structure itself.
 Capillary rise. Capillary rise is the rise in a liquid above the level of zero pressure due to a net
upward force produced by the attraction of the water molecules to a solid surface (e.g., soil).
Capillary rise can be substantial, up to 20 ft. or more. In general, the smaller the soil grain size,
the greater the potential for capillary rise. Often, capillary rise is a problem in areas of high
groundwater tables.

Most pavements have performed adequately without considering these effects. However, HMA
pavements can fail because of subgrade support deterioration as a result of excessive moisture or
other water-related problems. These issues can be addressed in two manners:

1. Minimize water infiltration into the pavement structure. In most cases, the accumulated water in
the underlying subgrade that causes the damage comes from surface infiltration. This infiltration
can be minimized by providing proper roadside drainage and minimizing air voids within the
HMA.
2. Provide subsurface drainage. This needs to be done judiciously, because it may be somewhat akin
to treating the symptom rather than the problem. Subsurface drainage consists of three basic
elements (see Figure 3):

Figure 3: Subsurface Drainage

Example

 A permeable base to provide for rapid removal of water which enters the pavement structure.
Based on recent research from California, permeable base layers may strip and become clogged
with fines thus weakening the overall pavement structure. If unbound, they may also be less
stable than a dense-graded aggregate.
 A method of conveying the removed water away from the pavement structure. At the least, this
may consist of a base sloped towards a drainage ditch. At the most, this may consist of a pipe
collector system.
 A filter layer (such as a geotextile, graded aggregate layer or ACB) to prevent the migration of
fines into the permeable base from the subgrade, subbase or shoulder base material. Excess fines
in the permeable base will clog its drainage routes and render it ineffective. Depending upon the
subgrade and pavement structure a filter layer may not be used.
 Figure 4:
Untreated Permeable Base Figure 5: Delivery

Figure 6:
Placement on Top of a Geotextile Fabric Figure 7: Grading

Design Life
Pavements are typically designed for a specified “design life”. Design life (or “design period”) is
the time from original construction to a terminal condition for a pavement structure. A terminal
condition refers to a state where the pavement needs reconstruction.

Structural design is carried out so that the pavement structure is sufficient to withstand the traffic
loading encountered over the pavement’s design life. It is recognized that intermittent
maintenance and rehabilitation efforts may be needed to preserve a pavement’s
surface qualityand ensure that the structure lasts through the design life.

Additional Tire Information

Figure 1 shows the following tire terminology:
 1. Section Width. Width of the tire at its widest point (outer sidewall to inner sidewall) including
“growth” due to inflation.
2. Minimum Dual Spacing. Minimum distance from the center of one tire assembly to another on
a dual tire axle. Minimum spacing precludes tire rubbing, excessive heat generation,
and stone damage (those caught between tires). This spacing has implications in pavement
analyses since the center-to-center tire spacing must be modeled. Figure 2 shows typical center-
to-center tire spacing.
3. Nominal Rim Diameter. Used, along with Section Width, to describe tire sizes.

Figure 1. Tire
terminology.
 Figure 2. Typical dual tire spacing.

Tire Size Example

If a bias ply truck tire has a designated tire size of 12.00 – 24, then the section width is
approximately 12 in. and the nominal rim diameter is 24 in. For truck tires, the design rim
width is about 2.5 to 5.0 in. less than the section width (difference depends on tire size).

Bias and Radial Ply Tires

Tires are classified based on their internal construction as well as their external features. The
two major classifications, bias and radial, refer to the orientation of their internal plies (or chords,
Figure 3).
 Figure 3. Bias and
radial ply tires.

Bias tire plies (cords) are laid diagonally during manufacture, while radial tire plies are laid
radially during manufacture which results in a more flexible tire wall. These different
construction methods result in different tire performance, which leads to the following
advantages and disadvantages:

Advantages of Radial Tires Compared to Bias Tires:

 Reduced fuel consumption. About 20 percent of truck fuel consumption is due to rolling
resistance. Thus, a 5 percent reduction in rolling resistance will produce a 1 percent fuel saving
(Fitch, 1984[1]). It is reasonable to expect a reduction in rolling resistance of about 30 to 40
percent, thus a 6 to 8 percent fuel savings.
 Softer ride. Because of their ply layout, radial tire sidewalls flex more than bias-ply tires, which
generally results in a larger, more stable ground contact area and softer ride.
 Less vibration. Due to radial tire construction, tires have less tendency to have tire lug-induced
vibrations.
 Extended tire life. As bias ply tires rotate and deflect, the bias (or crossed) plies interact and
generate heat (Michelin, 1986[2]) which accelerates tire aging. Therefore, radial-ply tires may last
as much as 30 percent longer than bias-ply tires doing comparable work.

Disadvantages of Radial Tires Compared to Bias Tires:

 Poor transport handling characteristics. Tire sway increases as speed increases. This is
probably due to low lateral stiffness that produces poor handling.
 Less forgiving of abuse. Overload or under-inflation will cause sidewall bulge that is more
susceptible to sidewall damage and puncture.

 Radials track more consistently in a wheeltrack. This is particularly true if the wheeltrack has
an existing depression or rut. These tracking differences are attributable to the ply layout (the
bias (cross) plies have greater tendency to “crawl” out of a wheeltrack depression than a radial
 ply constructed tire). The net effect is that radial tires, due to ply layout, likely contribute to some
of the wheeltrack rutting on Interstate highways.

Footnotes (↵ returns to text)

1. Motor Truck Engineering Handbook. James W. Fitch, Publisher. Anacortes, WA.↵

2. Michelin Truck, Industrial and Off-the-Road Tire Data Book, 1985-86. Michelin Tire
Corporation. Greenville, SC.↵