Post on 12-Jul-2020
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Detail Project Report PADOLI – DATALA–DEWADA – SHIONI – HADASTI – RAJURA ROAD (SH-372)
PACKAGE-143 (Old-76A)
Existing Chainage 00+000
To
Existing Chainage 35+500
[Length 35.50 km]
Prepared by:
T.P.F Engineering Pvt. Ltd
Padoli
0+000
Rajura 35+500
ChandrapurDatala 2+900
Kosara 0+900
Dewada 5+100
Kadholi BK 20+600
MJB
WardhaRiver
N
Paoni
25+100
VOLUME – 2
SURVEY & DESIGN REPORT
1
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Table of Content
Sr.No. Volume Index
1 Benkelman beam Report
2 Existing crust
3 Geotechnical report
4 Traffic data
5 CBR(Earth) report
6 Pavement Design
7 Source Material Report
2
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Benkelman beam Report
BENKELMAN BEAM DEFLECTION TESTING REPORT
1.1 Introduction
The PWD is Public Work Department; a Government of Maharashtra, India undertaking is
contemplating to enhance the traffic capacity and safety for efficient transportation of goods as
well as passenger traffic on the heavy trafficked National Highway sections. The project under
consideration aims at evaluating residual strength of the existing pavement and assessing the
strengthening requirements for the two lanes with paved shoulder carriageway section of SH-
372 from Km. 0.000 to Km. 35.500, located in the state of Maharashtra.
1.2 Objective
The objective of the present study is to conduct the BBD survey of the pavement for all the
lanes of the main carriageway using the Benkelman deflection technique.
1.3 Basic Principle of Deflection Method
Benkelman devised the simple deflection beam in 1953 for measurement of pavement surface
deflection on the WASHO test road. Deflection beam has been in use in India for more than
two decades for the design of flexible overlays. Performance of flexible pavements is closely
related to the elastic deflection of pavement under the wheel loads. The deformation or elastic
deflection under a given load depends upon sub grade soil type, its moisture content and
compaction, the thickness and quality of the pavement courses, drainage conditions, and
pavement surface temperature.
1.4 General
The strengthening requirement for an existing flexible pavement can be evaluated by using the
Benkelman Beam Deflection technique. Benkelman beam deflection testing was carried out
during 01th September 2017 along the existing project road. Complete safety precautions have
been taken during the testing in order to avoid accidents and to ensure safety. The following
procedure has been adopted as outlined by IRC: 81-1997.
� A standard truck having rear axle weighing 8,170 kg fitted with dual tyre inflated to a
pressure of 5.60 kg/cm2 was used for loading the pavement. The load on the rear axle
was weighed at a permanent weigh bridge nearby.
3
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
� The instrument was calibrated using metallic pieces of known thickness to ensure that
the beam and Dial Gauge are working properly.
� Pavement deflection was measured using the Canadian Good Road Association
(C.G.R.A.) procedure as described in the IRC: 81-1997
� Deflection measurements were taken in each lane of traffic along the predominant
wheel path /1.5 m from main carriageway.
� The dual wheels of the truck were centered above the selected point. The probe of the
Benkelman Beam was inserted between the dual tires and placed on the selected point.
� The locking pin was removed from the beam and the legs are adjusted such that beam
was leveled.
� The dial gauge was adjusted such that the beam is in contact with the stem of the dial
gauge throughout the test and the initial dial gauge reading was recorded.
� The truck was slowly driven forward a distance of 270 cm, stopped and intermediate
dial gauge reading was recorded.
� The truck was moved further 900 cm away and the final dial gauge reading was
recorded.
� Pavement temperature was recorded at intervals of every one hour as specified in the
code, by inserting a digital thermometer in the hole (approximately 45 cm deep and 10
mm diameter) drilled in the pavement after filling with glycerol.
1.5 Measurement of Field Moisture Content
The subgrade soil type and its field moisture content shall be known for BBD analysis. For
this purpose a test pit at the shoulder was dug and subgrade soil sample was collected. The
field moisture content was found using Calcium Carbide Method (Rapid Moisture Meter). The
subgrade soil sample was tested in the laboratory to know the type and plasticity properties.
The subgrade soil was found to be gravel having no plasticity.
4
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Field Moisture Content (FMC)
Padoli to Rajura
S.No. Chainage F.M.C (%) Type of soil PI (%)
1 0+100 LHS 12 Red soil 9
2 3+000 LHS 14 Clay 15
3 6+000 LHS 16 Black 16
4 9+000 LHS 19 Black 18
5 11+000 LHS 15 Clay 14
6 13+000 RHS 13 Black 18
7 15+000 LHS 16 Clay 17
8 20+000 RHS 21 Black 19
9 21+500 LHS 7 Murrum 5
10 24+000 LHS 15 Clay 18
11 26+000 LHS 17 Clay 16
12 28+000 RHS 19 Clay 17
13 30+500 LHS 9 Murrum 3
14 33+000 RHS 18 Clay 19
15 34+500 LHS 16 Sand+Clay 12
1.6 Corrections
The pavement temperature and seasonal variation in climate influence the deflections
measured by the Benkelman Beam. Pavement temperature was recorded once every hour by
inserting a thermometer in a hole (approximately 45 mm deep and 10 mm diameter) drilled in
the pavement and filled with glycerol as shown below.
5
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
� At any deviation of the pavement temperature during measurements from the standard
temperature of 35oC, correction has been applied to the deflection measured in
accordance with the procedure described in IRC: 81-1997.
� The seasonal correction shall depend on type of subgrade soil, its field moisture
content, and average annual rainfall in the area. Subgrade soils have been divided into
three broad categories, namely sandy / gravelly, clay with low plasticity and clay with
high plasticity. Similarly, rainfall has been divided into two categories, namely low
(<1300 mm) and high rainfall (>=1300 mm). Moisture correction factors shall be
obtained from figures as shown below.
6
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
PI and field moisture content of the subgrade were established from test pit excavations
carried out simultaneously with the Benkelman Beam tests. The mean and standard deviation
for ten consecutive points in each section has been computed after applying temperature and
seasonal variation corrections. Finally, the characteristic deflection for every kilometer (mean
deflection + 2 x standard deviation) is determined.
1.7 Strengthening Overlay Design
BBD Testing and Analysis
Benkelman beam deflection testing was carried out in both the sections along the existing
project road, except in existing structure locations and damaged pavement sections. BBD
analysis has been done by CGRA (Canadian Good Roads Association) approach by applying
the temperature and seasonal correction factors to arrive the rebound deflection as depicted in
IRC: 81-1997.
1.8 Results and Conclusions
The characteristic deflection per Km. of the road under study is given in Table as shown
below. The characteristic deflection values obtained from survey shows that the road is needs
to be overlay.
Characteristic Deflection on Carriageway
Summary
S. No: Chainage (Km)
Characteristics Deflection
Deflection on Both Sides (mm)
Characteristic Deflection (mm)
1 Km 0.000 to Km 1.000 1.216 1.216
2 Km 0.000 to Km 1.000 1.089 1.089
3 Km 1.000 to Km 2.000 1.269 1.269
4 Km 2.000 to Km 3.000 1.299 1.299
5 Km 3.000 to Km 4.000 1.617 1.617
6 Km 4.000 to Km 5.000 1.422 1.422
7 Km 5.000 to Km 6.000 1.509 1.509
8 Km 6.000 to Km 7.000 1.512 1.512
7
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Summary
S. No: Chainage (Km)
Characteristics Deflection
Deflection on Both Sides (mm)
Characteristic Deflection (mm)
9 Km 7.000 to Km 8.000 1.095 1.095
10 Km 8.000 to Km 9.000 1.168 1.168
11 Km 9.000 to Km 10.000 2.585 2.585
12 Km 10.000 to Km 11.000 0.940 0.940
13 Km 11.000 to Km 12.000 1.271 1.271
14 Km 12.000 to Km 13.000 poor condition poor condition
15 Km 13.000 to Km 14.000 poor condition poor condition
16 Km 14.000 to Km 15.000 1.243 1.243
17 Km 15.000 to Km 16.000 1.291 1.291
18 Km 16.000 to Km 17.000 1.198 1.198
19 Km17.000 to Km 18.000 Bridge Bridge
20 Km 18.000 to Km 19.000 1.016 1.016
21 Km 19.000 to Km 20.000 1.099 1.099
22 Km 20.000 to Km 21.000 1.206 1.206
23 Km 21.000 to Km 22.000 1.350 1.350
24 Km 22.000 to Km 23.000 1.223 1.223
25 Km 23.000 to Km 24.000 1.186 1.186
26 Km 24.000 to Km 25.000 1.272 1.272
27 Km 25.000 to Km 26.000 1.284 1.284
28 Km 26.000 to Km 27.000 1.310 1.310
29 Km 27.000 to Km 28.000 1.299 1.299
30 Km 28.000 to Km 29.000 1.180 1.180
31 Km 29.000 to Km 30.000 1.137 1.137
32 Km 30.000 to Km 31.000 1.205 1.205
33 Km 31.000 to Km 32.000 1.159 1.159
8
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Summary
S. No: Chainage (Km)
Characteristics Deflection
Deflection on Both Sides (mm)
Characteristic Deflection (mm)
34 Km 32.000 to Km 33.000 1.087 1.087
35 Km 33.000 to Km 34.000 1.061 1.061
36 Km 34.000 to Km 35.000 1.223 1.223
37 Km 35.000 to Km 35.500 1.338 1.338
Some photographs while doing the BBD Survey are presented below
Recording Deflection Values Pouring Glycerol into the Hole
Recording Deflection Values Recording Deflection Values
9
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Recording Field Moisture Content
Taken Soil samples from Test Pits
10
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Cha
ract
eris
tic D
efle
ctio
n in
mm
Chainage (Km)
Characteristic Deflection from Km 0.000 to Km 20.000
Chainage (Km)
Characteristic Deflection (mm)
11
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
Cha
ract
eris
tic D
efle
ctio
n in
mm
Chainage (Km)
Characteristic Deflection from Km 20.000 to Km 35.000
Chainage (Km)
Characteristic
Deflection (mm)
12
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Existing Crust
Summary
S. No: Chainage (Km) CRUST TOTAL CRUST
1 Km 0.000 to Km 1.000 30+220 250 2 Km 1.000 to Km 2.000 30+235 265 3 Km 2.000 to Km 3.000 25+240 265 4 Km 3.000 to Km 4.000 45+240 285 5 Km 4.000 to Km 5.000 45+250 295 6 Km 5.000 to Km 6.000 40+250 290 7 Km 6.000 to Km 7.000 50+240 290 8 Km 7.000 to Km 8.000 45+260 305 9 Km 8.000 to Km 9.000 60+250 310 10 Km 9.000 to Km 10.000 70+260 330 11 Km 10.000 to Km 11.000 50+260 310 12 Km 11.000 to Km 12.000 45+250 295 13 Km 12.000 to Km 13.000 20+235 255 14 Km 13.000 to Km 14.000 25+230 255 15 Km 14.000 to Km 15.000 20+240 260 16 Km 15.000 to Km 16.000 20+250 270 17 Km 16.000 to Km 17.000 20+240 260 18 Km17.000 to Km 18.000 80+300 380 19 Km 18.000 to Km 19.000 85+300 385 20 Km 19.000 to Km 20.000 85+300 385 21 Km 20.000 to Km 21.000 90+300 390 22 Km 21.000 to Km 22.000 20+240 260 23 Km 22.000 to Km 23.000 20+230 250 24 Km 23.000 to Km 24.000 20+245 265 25 Km 24.000 to Km 25.000 20+240 260 26 Km 25.000 to Km 26.000 20+235 255 27 Km 26.000 to Km 27.000 20+240 260 28 Km 27.000 to Km 28.000 20+235 255 29 Km 28.000 to Km 29.000 30+240 270 30 Km 29.000 to Km 30.000 40+240 280 31 Km 30.000 to Km 31.000 90+300 390 32 Km 31.000 to Km 32.000 85+300 385 33 Km 32.000 to Km 33.000 90+300 390 34 Km 33.000 to Km 34.000 55+260 315 35 Km 34.000 to Km 35.000 60+250 310 36 Km 35.000 to Km 35.500 60+280 340
13
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Geo-Technical Reports
Structural works:
1. MJB –1 No-To be Retained
2. MNB- Total-20 Nos.
• MNB- 13 Nos. - To be Reconstructed. • MNB- 07 Nos. - To be Retained as it is. 3. Slab Drain - Total-3 No. • Slab Drain - 1 No. -To be Retained as it is • Slab Drain - 2 No. –New Slab Drain Proposed 4. Hume pipe culverts:-61 Nos. � Hume pipe culverts57 Nos. :- To be Reconstructed.
� New Structure Proposed with RCC NP-4 Pipes
Sr .no.
Chainage AS per Throne
Chainage as per Inventory
Type of structu
re Provision Proposal BH No.
Borehole termination Depth
Foundation Depth
Allowable bearing capacity
Depth to weathered Rock
1 24+600 24+570 Minor bridge 2x10.00
Reconstruction
BH-23 15.0m 1.5m 15t/m2 7.5
BH-24 22.5m 3.0m 25t/m2 10.5
2 24+500 24+455 Minor bridge 2x6.00
Reconstruction
BH-25 21.0m 3.0m 25t/m2 -
BH-26 12.0m
1.5m 12t/m2 - 3.0m 20t/m2 -
3 12+100 12+125 Minor bridge 3x8.00
Reconstruction
BH-27 18.0m 1.5m 15t/m2 12.0
BH-28 15.0m 3.0m 20t/m2 12.0
4 25+600 25+570 Minor bridge 2x10.00
Reconstruction
BH-29 16.5m 1.5m 15t/m2 - BH-30 13.5m 3.0m 25t/m2 -
5 28+400 28+300 Minor Bridge 5x10.00
Reconstruction
BH-33 19.5m 1.5m 15t/m2 - BH-34 15.0m 3.0m 25t/m2 -
6 29+000 28+880 Minor Bridge 1x6.00
Reconstruction
BH-35 15.0m 1.5m 15t/m2 - BH-36 12.0m 3.0m 25t/m2 -
7 32+500 32+350 Minor Bridge 2x10.00
Reconstruction
BH-37 16.5m 1.5m 15t/m2 -
BH-38 13.5m 3.0m 25t/m2 12.0
14
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Allowable Pile Capacities(BH-23),(BH-25),(BH-27),(BH-28),(BH-38)
Pile Diameter(mm)
Pile rock socketing depth
Vertical Capacity of pile (Tons)
Safe Lateral Capacity (Tons)
Safe Uplift Capacity (Tons)
800
5D
220 21 82
900 280 27 102
1000 350 33 130
1200 500 48 185 800
8D
288 21 90
900 362 27 112
1000 455 33 142
1200 650 48 202
The rock is not encountered near these boreholes
Allowable Pile Capacities(BH-24),(BH-26),(BH-29),(BH-30,33,34,35,36)
Pile Diameter(mm)
Length of Pile
Vertical Capacity of pile (Tons)
Safe Lateral Capacity (Tons) Safe Uplift
Capacity (Tons)
800
15.0
120 13 50
900 150 16 62
1000 188 20 80
1200 270 29 114
800
20.0
155 13 75
900 195 16 95
1000 245 20 125
1200 372 29 175
800
25.0
195 13 110
900 245 16 140
1000 305 20 175
1200 435 29 250
15
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
16
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
17
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
18
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
19
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
20
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
21
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
22
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
23
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
24
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
25
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
26
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
27
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
28
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
29
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
30
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
31
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
32
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Location: Date:Direction: Day:
Mini Bus RTC Bus Pvt.Bus LCV-3 LCV-4/6 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV
12:00-13:00 102 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 117 11 12813:00-14:00 102 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 114 6 12014:00-15:00 90 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 100 6 10615:00-16:00 75 1 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 89 6 9516:00-17:00 88 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 98 2 10017:00-18:00 97 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 104 10 11418:00-19:00 72 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 74 10 8419:00-20:00 39 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 2 4320:00-21:00 32 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 8 4221:00-22:00 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 1422:00-23:00 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 1023:00-00:00 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 500:00-01:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 101:00-02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 002:00-03:00 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 303:00-04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 004:00-05:00 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 605:00-06:00 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 1306:00-07:00 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 39 2 4107:00-08:00 71 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 84 5 8908:00-09:00 92 0 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 0 111 4 11509:00-10:00 69 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 1 82 6 8810:00-11:00 112 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 1 0 0 1 0 3 5 0 0 124 13 13711:00-12:00 90 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 96 6 102
Total 1211 22 73 1 1 0 0 0 3 65 6 8 0 3 0 14 48 0 1 1356 100 1456Rural PCU
Factors 0.5 1 1 1 1 1.5 3 3 1.5 1.5 3 3 4.5 1.5 4.5 8 0.5 2 1
Total PCU 605.5 22 73 1 1 0 0 0 4.5 97.5 18 24 0 4.5 0 112 24 0 1 988% Composition 83.17% 1.51% 5.01% 0.07% 0.07% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.21% 4.46% 0.41% 0.55% 0.00% 0.21% 0.00% 0.96% 3.30% 0.00% 0.07% 93.13% 6.87% 100.00%
Motorized Vehicle Non-Motorised Vehicles
Total Passenger Vehicles
Cycle Rickshaw
Others Two Wheeler
Auto Richshaw
Car/Jeep/Taxi
Fast Passenger Fast GoodsGrand TotalTrucks
Monday
Total Freight VehiclesShared
TaxiVan/
Tempo
Bus LCVSlow Goods
Animla/Hand
Rajura to Padoli and Padoli to Rajura
CycleTractor
Tractor with Trailer
ADT(In terms of Veh.)30/10/2017
Time
Pauni Ch.27+500
Traffic Reports
33
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Location: Date:
Direction: Day:
Other Grand Total
Two Wheeler
Auto Richshaw
Car/Jeep/Taxi
Shared Taxi
Van/ Tempo
Mini BusRTC Bus
Pvt.Bus LCV-3 LCV-4/62 Axle (MCV)
3 Axle (HCV)
MAV TractorTractor
with Trailer
Animla/ Hand
cycleCycle
RickshawOthers
(In Terms of VEH.)
83.17% 1.51% 5.01% 0.07% 0.07% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.21% 4.46% 0.41% 0.55% 0.00% 0.21% 0.00% 0.96% 3.30% 0.00% 0.07% 93.13% 6.87% 100.00%
Fast Passenger Fast Goods
Composition in %
BUS LCV TRUCK Agri.Tractor Toll ExemptedTotal
Passenger Vehicles
Total Freight Vehicles
30/10/2017
Monday
Ch.27+500
TRAFFIC COMPOSITION
Pauni
Slow GoodsNon-Motorised Vehicles
Rajura to Padoli and Padoli to Rajura
Motorized Vehicle
Two Wheeler, 83.17%
Auto Richshaw, 1.51%
Car/Jeep/Taxi, 5.01%
Shared Taxi, 0.07%
Van/ Tempo, 0.07%Mini Bus, 0.00%
RTC Bus, 0.00%
Pvt.Bus, 0.00%
LCV-3, 0.21%
LCV-4/6, 4.46%
2 Axle (MCV), 0.41%
3 Axle (HCV), 0.55%
MAV, 0.00%
Tractor, 0.21%
Tractor with Trailer , 0.00%
Animla/ Hand, 0.96%
cycle, 3.30%
Cycle Rickshaw, 0.00%
34
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Location: Date:
Direction: Day:
Mini Bus
RTC Bus Pvt.Bus LCV-3 LCV-4/6 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV
12:00-13:00 102 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 117 11 128 8.63 11.00 8.79
13:00-14:00 102 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 114 6 120 8.41 6.00 8.24
14:00-15:00 90 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 100 6 106 7.37 6.00 7.28
15:00-16:00 75 1 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 89 6 95 6.56 6.00 6.52
16:00-17:00 88 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 98 2 100 7.23 2.00 6.87
17:00-18:00 97 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 104 10 114 7.67 10.00 7.83
18:00-19:00 72 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 74 10 84 5.46 10.00 5.77
19:00-20:00 39 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 2 43 3.02 2.00 2.95
20:00-21:00 32 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 8 42 2.51 8.00 2.88
21:00-22:00 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 14 0.96 1.00 0.96
22:00-23:00 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 0.74 0.00 0.69
23:00-00:00 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0.37 0.00 0.34
00:00-01:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.07 0.00 0.07
01:00-02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
02:00-03:00 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0.15 1.00 0.21
03:00-04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
04:00-05:00 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 6 0.37 1.00 0.41
05:00-06:00 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 13 0.96 0.00 0.89
06:00-07:00 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 39 2 41 2.88 2.00 2.82
07:00-08:00 71 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 84 5 89 6.19 5.00 6.11
08:00-09:00 92 0 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 0 111 4 115 8.19 4.00 7.90
09:00-10:00 69 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 1 82 6 88 6.05 6.00 6.04
10:00-11:00 112 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 1 0 0 1 0 3 5 0 0 124 13 137 9.14 13.00 9.41
11:00-12:00 90 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 96 6 102 7.079646 6.00 7.01
Total 1211 22 73 1 1 0 0 0 3 65 6 8 0 3 0 14 48 0 1 1356 100 1456 100 100 100
30/10/2017
Monday
Grand Total
Time
Motorized Vehicle Non-Motorised Vehicles
Total Passenger Vehicles
Total Freight Vehicles
TrucksTractor with
TrailerCycle
Cycle Rickshaw
Others Two Wheeler
Fast Passenger
Car/Jeep/Taxi
Shared Taxi
Auto Richshaw
HOURLY VARIATION
Fast Goods
Pauni
Rajura to Padoli and Padoli to Rajura
Ch.27+500
Slow Goods
Animla/Hand
Van/ Tempo
Bus LCV
Tractor
Hourly Variation Pass.Veh.
Hourly Variation
freight Veh.
Hourly Variation
for all vehicles
35
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 13:00
12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 12:00
All Vehicles
All …
HOURLY VARIATION
Start End All 12:00 13:00 8.7913:00 14:00 8.2414:00 15:00 7.2815:00 16:00 6.5216:00 17:00 6.8717:00 18:00 7.8318:00 19:00 5.7719:00 20:00 2.9520:00 21:00 2.8821:00 22:00 0.9622:00 23:00 0.6923:00 0:00 0.340:00 1:00 0.071:00 2:00 0.002:00 3:00 0.213:00 4:00 0.004:00 5:00 0.415:00 6:00 0.896:00 7:00 2.827:00 8:00 6.118:00 9:00 7.909:00 10:00 6.0410:00 11:00 9.4112:00 13:00 7.01
36
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Location: Date:Direction: Day:
Mini Bus RTC Bus Pvt.Bus LCV-3 LCV-4/6 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV
12:00-13:00 102 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 117 11 128
13:00-14:00 102 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 114 6 120
14:00-15:00 90 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 100 6 106
15:00-16:00 75 1 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 89 6 95
16:00-17:00 88 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 98 2 100
17:00-18:00 97 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 104 10 114
18:00-19:00 72 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 74 10 84
19:00-20:00 39 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 2 43
20:00-21:00 32 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 8 42
21:00-22:00 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 14
22:00-23:00 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10
23:00-00:00 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5
00:00-01:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
01:00-02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:00-03:00 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3
03:00-04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00-05:00 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 6
05:00-06:00 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 13
06:00-07:00 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 39 2 41
07:00-08:00 71 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 84 5 89
08:00-09:00 92 0 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 0 111 4 115
09:00-10:00 69 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 1 82 6 88
10:00-11:00 112 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 1 0 0 1 0 3 5 0 0 124 13 137
11:00-12:00 90 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 96 6 102Total 1211 22 73 1 1 0 0 0 3 65 6 8 0 3 0 14 48 0 1 1356 100 1456
Rural PCU Factors 0.5 1 1 1 1 1.5 3 3 1.5 1.5 3 3 4.5 1.5 4.5 8 0.5 2 1
Total PCU 605.5 22 73 1 1 0 0 0 4.5 97.5 18 24 0 4.5 0 112 24 0 1 988% Composition 83.17% 1.51% 5.01% 0.07% 0.07% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.21% 4.46% 0.41% 0.55% 0.00% 0.21% 0.00% 0.96% 3.30% 0.00% 0.07% 93.13% 6.87% 100.00%
Bus
30/10/2017MondayRajura to Padoli and Padoli to Rajura
Pauni Ch.27+500
Time
Motorized Vehicle Non-Motorised Vehicles
Total Passenger Vehicles
Total Freight Vehicles
LCV TrucksTractor with
TrailerCar/Jeep/Ta
xiShared Taxi
Van/ Tempo
Traffic Volume Count Survey Data For Pauni
Grand TotalFast Passenger Fast Goods Slow Goods
Animla/Hand
CycleCycle
RickshawOthers Two
WheelerAuto
RichshawTractor
PEAK HOUR
37
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
95.74%
4.26%
Motorized : Non-Motorized % Share Pauni
MOTORIZED VEHICLES
NON-MOTORIZED VEHICLES
% Share
Share of Motorized vehicles and Non Motorized vehicles
MOTORIZED VEHICLES
NON-MOTORIZED VEHICLES TOTAL
95.74% 4.26% 100.00%
93.13%
6.87%
Passenger : Freight % Share at Pauni
PASSENGER VEHICLES
FREIGHT VEHICLES
Share of freight vehicles and Passenger vehicles
PASSENGER VEHICLES
FREIGHT VEHICLES TOTAL
93.13% 6.87% 100.00%
38
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Axle Load Report
Location: Day: TuesdayDirection : Date: 5/9/2017
S. No.No. of axles (Sa)
% Category (Sa/SA)*1
00
Eqivalency
Factor(Se)
ESA (Sa*Se)
% of damaging Factor
1 0 900 5 5.81 0.0002 0.00 0.022 900 1810 47 54.65 0.0020 0.09 1.593 1810 2720 18 20.93 0.0090 0.16 2.744 2720 3630 5 5.81 0.0310 0.16 2.625 3630 4540 4 4.65 0.0800 0.32 5.416 4540 5450 3 3.49 0.1760 0.53 8.937 5450 6360 1 1.16 0.3500 0.35 5.928 6360 7270 0 0.00 0.6100 0.00 0.009 7270 8180 2 2.33 1.0000 2.00 33.8410 8180 9090 0 0.00 1.5500 0.00 0.0011 9090 10000 1 1.16 2.3000 2.30 38.9212 10000 10910 0 0.00 3.2700 0.00 0.0013 10910 11820 0 0.00 4.4800 0.00 0.0014 11820 12730 0 0.00 5.9800 0.00 0.0015 12730 13640 0 0.00 7.8000 0.00 0.0016 13640 14550 0 0.00 10.0000 0.00 0.0017 14550 15450 0 0.00 12.5000 0.00 0.0018 15450 16350 0 0.00 15.5000 0.00 0.0019 16350 17260 0 0.00 19.0000 0.00 0.0020 17260 18170 0 0.00 23.0000 0.00 0.0021 18170 19081 0 0.00 27.7000 0.00 0.0022 19081 19988 0 0.00 33.0000 0.00 0.0023 19988 20895 0 0.00 39.3000 0.00 0.0024 20895 21802 0 0.00 46.5000 0.00 0.0025 21802 22712 0 0.00 55.0000 0.00 0.0026 22712 23619 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 86 100.00 5.91 100.00
Total no. of Axles (SA)= = 86Total Damaging Factor (ESA), Z = 5.91Total nrs. of Axles Weighed, X = 86Axle Equivalency, Z/X = 0.07Total nrs. of Vehicles Weighed, y = 43
Vehicle Damaging Factor, Z/y = 0.14
Axle Load Category
Axle Load SurveyRajoli
Both Direction
Vehicle Damaging Factor for LCV
39
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Location: Day: Tuesday
Direction : Date: 5/9/2017
S. No.No. of axles (Sa)
% Categor
y (Sa/SA)*
100
Eqivalency
Factor(Se)
ESA (Sa*Se)
% of damaging Factor
1 0 900 0 0.00 0.0002 0.00 0.002 900 1810 3 15.00 0.0020 0.01 0.033 1810 2720 2 10.00 0.0090 0.02 0.104 2720 3630 2 10.00 0.0310 0.06 0.355 3630 4540 1 5.00 0.0800 0.08 0.456 4540 5450 3 15.00 0.1760 0.53 2.997 5450 6350 2 10.00 0.3500 0.70 3.978 6350 7260 1 5.00 0.6100 0.61 3.469 7260 8160 1 5.00 1.0000 1.00 5.6610 8160 9070 2 10.00 1.5500 3.10 17.5611 9070 9980 1 5.00 2.3000 2.30 13.0312 9980 10890 1 5.00 3.2700 3.27 18.5213 10890 11790 0 0.00 4.4800 0.00 0.0014 11790 12700 1 5.00 5.9800 5.98 33.8715 12700 13610 0 0.00 7.8000 0.00 0.0016 13610 14520 0 0.00 10.0000 0.00 0.0017 14520 15420 0 0.00 12.5000 0.00 0.0018 15420 16320 0 0.00 15.5000 0.00 0.0019 16320 17230 0 0.00 19.0000 0.00 0.0020 17230 18140 0 0.00 23.0000 0.00 0.0021 18140 19051 0 0.00 27.7000 0.00 0.0022 19051 19958 0 0.00 33.0000 0.00 0.0023 19958 20865 0 0.00 39.3000 0.00 0.0024 20865 21772 0 0.00 46.5000 0.00 0.0025 21772 22680 0 0.00 55.0000 0.00 0.0026 22680 23587 0 0.00 0.00 0.0027 23587 24494 0 0.00 0.00 0.0028 24494 25404 0 0.0029 25404 26314 0 0.00
Total 20 100.00 17.65 100.00
Total no. of Axles (SA) = 20Total Damaging Factor (ESA), Z = 17.65Total nrs. of Axles Weighed, X = 20Axle Equivalency, Z/X = 0.88Total nrs. of Vehicles Weighed, y = 10
Vehicle Damaging Factor, Z/y = 1.77
Axle Load Category
Axle Load SurveyRajoli
Both Direction
Vehicle Damaging Factor for 2AXLE
40
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Day: Tuesday
Date: 5/9/2017
S. No.No. of axles (Sa)
% Category (Sa/SA)*
100
Eqivalency
Factor(Se)
ESA (Sa*Se)
% of damaging Factor
S. No.No. of axles (Sa)
% Category (Sa/SA)*100
Eqivalency
Factor(Se)
ESA (Sa*Se)
% of damaging Factor
1 0 900 0 0.00 0.0002 0.00 0.00 1 0 900 2 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.002 900 1810 0 0.00 0.0020 0.00 0.00 2 900 1810 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.003 1810 2720 0 0.00 0.0090 0.00 0.00 3 1810 2720 0 0.00 0.001 0.00 0.004 2720 3630 1 0.75 0.0310 0.03 0.02 4 2720 3630 10 0.00 0.003 0.03 0.005 3630 4540 14 10.45 0.0800 1.12 0.79 5 3630 4540 8 0.00 0.006 0.05 0.006 4540 5450 35 26.12 0.1760 6.16 4.35 6 4540 5450 0 0.00 0.013 0.00 0.007 5450 6350 10 7.46 0.3500 3.50 2.47 7 5450 6350 2 0.00 0.024 0.05 0.008 6350 7260 28 20.90 0.6100 17.08 12.06 8 6350 7260 5 0.00 0.043 0.22 0.009 7260 8160 19 14.18 1.0000 19.00 13.42 9 7260 8160 8 0.00 0.070 0.56 0.0010 8160 9070 6 4.48 1.5500 9.30 6.57 10 8160 9070 2 0.00 0.110 0.22 0.0011 9070 9980 4 2.99 2.3000 9.20 6.50 11 9070 9980 4 0.00 0.166 0.66 0.0012 9980 10890 11 8.21 3.2700 35.97 25.41 12 9980 10890 8 0.00 0.242 1.94 0.0013 10890 11790 1 0.75 4.4800 4.48 3.16 13 10890 11790 8 0.00 0.342 2.74 0.0014 11790 12700 3 2.24 5.9800 17.94 12.67 14 11790 12700 2 0.00 0.470 0.94 0.0015 12700 13610 1 0.75 7.8000 7.80 5.51 15 12700 13610 6 0.00 0.633 3.80 0.0016 13610 14520 1 0.75 10.0000 10.00 7.06 16 13610 14520 2 0.00 0.834 1.67 0.0017 14520 15420 0 0.00 12.5000 0.00 0.00 17 14520 15420 0 0.00 1.080 0.00 0.0018 15420 16320 0 0.00 15.5000 0.00 0.00 18 15420 16320 0 0.00 1.380 0.00 0.0019 16320 17230 0 0.00 19.0000 0.00 0.00 19 16320 17230 0 0.00 1.730 0.00 0.0020 17230 18140 0 0.00 23.0000 0.00 0.00 20 17230 18140 0 0.00 2.140 0.00 0.0021 18140 19051 0 0.00 27.7000 0.00 0.00 21 18140 19051 0 0.00 2.610 0.00 0.0022 19051 19958 0 0.00 33.0000 0.00 0.00 22 19051 19958 0 0.00 3.160 0.00 0.0023 19958 20865 0 0.00 39.3000 0.00 0.00 23 19958 20865 0 0.00 3.790 0.00 0.0024 20865 21772 0 0.00 46.5000 0.00 0.00 24 20865 21772 0 0.00 4.490 0.00 0.0025 21772 22680 0 0.00 55.0000 0.00 0.00 25 21772 22680 0 0.00 5.280 0.00 0.00
Total 134 100.00 141.58 100.00 26 22680 23587 0 0.00 6.170 0.00 0.0027 23587 24494 0 0.00 7.150 0.00 0.00
Total no. of Axles (SA) = 201 28 24494 25401 0 0.00 8.200 0.00 0.00
Total Damaging Factor (ESA), Z = 154.44 29 25401 26308 0 0.00 9.400 0.00 0.00
Total nrs. Of Axles Weighted, X = 201 30 26308 27216 0 0.00 10.700 0.00 0.00
Axle Equivalency, Z/X = 0.77 31 27216 28123 0 0.00 12.100 0.00 0.00
Total Nrs. Of Vehicles Weighted, y = 67 32 28123 29030 0 0.00 13.700 0.00 0.00
33 29030 29937 0 0.00 15.400 0.00 0.00
Vehicle Damaging Factor, Z/y = 2.31 34 29937 30844 0 0.00 17.200 0.00 0.00
35 30844 31752 0 0.00 19.200 0.00 0.0036 31752 32660 0 0.00 21.300 0.00 0.0037 32660 33566 0 0.00 23.600 0.00 0.0038 33566 34473 0 0.00 26.100 0.00 0.0039 34473 35380 0 0.00 28.800 0.00 0.0040 35380 36288 0 0.00 31.700 0.00 0.00
Total 67 0.00 279.3372 12.86 0.00
Axle Load SurveyLocation: Rajoli
Direction : Both Direction
Vehicle Damaging Factor for 3 Axle Truck
Single Axles Tandem Axles
Axle Load Category
Axle Load Category
41
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Day: Tuesday
Date: 5/9/2017
S. No.No. of
axles (Sa)
% Category (Sa/SA)*
100
Eqivalency
Factor(Se)
ESA (Sa*Se)
% of damaging Factor
S. No.
No. of axles (Sa)
% Category (Sa/SA)*1
00
Eqivalency
Factor(Se)
ESA (Sa*Se)
% of damaging Factor
1 0 900 1 0.49 0.0002 0.00 0.00 1 0 900 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.002 900 1810 0 0.00 0.0020 0.00 0.00 2 900 1810 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.003 1810 2720 0 0.00 0.0090 0.00 0.00 3 1810 2720 3 0.00 0.001 0.00 0.004 2720 3630 3 1.46 0.0310 0.09 0.07 4 2720 3630 25 0.00 0.003 0.08 0.005 3630 4540 26 12.62 0.0800 2.08 1.61 5 3630 4540 16 0.00 0.006 0.10 0.006 4540 5450 34 16.50 0.1760 5.98 4.63 6 4540 5450 2 0.00 0.013 0.03 0.007 5450 6350 39 18.93 0.3500 13.65 10.55 7 5450 6350 5 0.00 0.024 0.12 0.008 6350 7260 47 22.82 0.6100 28.67 22.16 8 6350 7260 15 0.00 0.043 0.65 0.009 7260 8160 35 16.99 1.0000 35.00 27.06 9 7260 8160 16 0.00 0.070 1.12 0.0010 8160 9070 13 6.31 1.5500 20.15 15.58 10 8160 9070 11 0.00 0.110 1.21 0.0011 9070 9980 5 2.43 2.3000 11.50 8.89 11 9070 9980 17 0.00 0.166 2.82 0.0012 9980 10890 1 0.49 3.2700 3.27 2.53 12 9980 10890 20 0.00 0.242 4.84 0.0013 10890 11790 2 0.97 4.4800 8.96 6.93 13 10890 11790 22 0.00 0.342 7.52 0.0014 11790 12700 0 0.00 5.9800 0.00 0.00 14 11790 12700 30 0.00 0.470 14.10 0.0015 12700 13610 0 0.00 7.8000 0.00 0.00 15 12700 13610 14 0.00 0.633 8.86 0.0016 13610 14520 0 0.00 10.0000 0.00 0.00 16 13610 14520 13 0.00 0.834 10.84 0.0017 14520 15420 0 0.00 12.5000 0.00 0.00 17 14520 15420 1 0.00 1.080 1.08 0.0018 15420 16320 0 0.00 15.5000 0.00 0.00 18 15420 16320 0 0.00 1.380 0.00 0.0019 16320 17230 0 0.00 19.0000 0.00 0.00 19 16320 17230 0 0.00 1.730 0.00 0.0020 17230 18140 0 0.00 23.0000 0.00 0.00 20 17230 18140 0 0.00 2.140 0.00 0.0021 18140 19051 0 0.00 27.7000 0.00 0.00 21 18140 19051 0 0.00 2.610 0.00 0.0022 19051 19958 0 0.00 33.0000 0.00 0.00 22 19051 19958 0 0.00 3.160 0.00 0.0023 19958 20865 0 0.00 39.3000 0.00 0.00 23 19958 20865 0 0.00 3.790 0.00 0.0024 20865 21772 0 0.00 46.5000 0.00 0.00 24 20865 21772 0 0.00 4.490 0.00 0.0025 21772 22680 0 0.00 55.0000 0.00 0.00 25 21772 22680 0 0.00 5.280 0.00 0.00
Total 206 100.00 129.36 100.00 26 22680 23587 0 0.00 6.170 0.00 0.0027 23587 24494 0 0.00 7.150 0.00 0.00
Total no. of Axles (SA) = 416 28 24494 25401 0 0.00 8.200 0.00 0.00
Total Damaging Factor (ESA), Z = 182.72 29 25401 26308 0 0.00 9.400 0.00 0.00
Total nrs. Of Axles Weighted, X = 416 30 26308 27216 0 0.00 10.700 0.00 0.00
Axle Equivalency, Z/X = 0.44 31 27216 28123 0 0.00 12.100 0.00 0.00
Total Nrs. Of Vehicles Weighted, y = 103 32 28123 29030 0 0.00 13.700 0.00 0.00
33 29030 29937 0 0.00 15.400 0.00 0.00
Vehicle Damaging Factor, Z/y = 1.77 34 29937 30844 0 0.00 17.200 0.00 0.00
35 30844 31752 0 0.00 19.200 0.00 0.0036 31752 32660 0 0.00 21.300 0.00 0.0037 32660 33566 0 0.00 23.600 0.00 0.0038 33566 34473 0 0.00 26.100 0.00 0.0039 34473 35380 0 0.00 28.800 0.00 0.0040 35380 36288 0 0.00 31.700 0.00 0.00
Total 210 0.00 53.37 0.00
Axle Load SurveyLocation: Rajoli
Direction : Both Direction
Vehicle Damaging Factor for MULTI Axle
Single Axles Tandem Axles
Axle Load CategoryAxle Load Category
42
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Location: DAY- TUESDAY
Direction :Date: 05/09/2017
Vehicles Computed
VDF Computed
0.14
1.77
2.31
1.77
LCV
2A
3A
MA
AXLE LOAD TEST
Summary of Vehicle Damaging Factor
Rajoli
Both Direction
Empty / Partial Loaded / Fully Loaded
Vehicle Category
43
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
CBR (Earth) Report
44
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
45
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
46
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
47
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
48
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
49
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
50
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
51
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
52
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
53
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
54
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
55
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
56
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Pavement Design
Introduction
The project road passes through Gondia District of Maharashtra.
1. The project Starts at Km 00/000 at Padoli (Junction of NH-930).
2. The project Ends at Km 35/500 at Junction with Rajura – Gadchandur Road near Rampur
Village.(Junction of MSH-10).
3. The Existing length of the project corridor is 35.50 km + Bypass (2.20km)
4. Major towns passing through the stretch:
Padoli – Kosara – Datala - Dewada – Shivani – Hadasti – Kadholi Bk. – Pauni – Gowari –
Mathara – Rampur - Rajura.
5. Existing road lane configuration: 4-Lane, 2 Lane, Intermediate lane and Single Lane.
6. Existing ROW: Varies from 10 m to 30m (Approximately)
Pavement design is one of the prime important aspect of DPR for road projects. IRC 37-2012
“Tentative Guidelines for the design of Flexible pavement” is used for design of flexible
pavements in India. These design guidelines are proposed for design of new flexible
pavements. The important design parameters considered in the design of new flexible
pavement are the sub-grade/subsoil strength, traffic intensity, loading etc.
Padoli
0+000
Rajura 35+500
ChandrapurDatala 2+900
Kosara 0+900
Dewada 5+100
Kadholi BK 20+600
MJB
WardhaRiver
N
Paoni
25+100
57
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Material Investigation for Pavement Design
The main objective of material investigation is to determine the strength of the existing Sub
soil/subgrade of the road pavements structure along the alignments. The objective for
investigation on existing crust materials is to ascertain the suitability of the material as a fill
for additional crust and use as existing subgrade or new subgrade with selected material and
also to ensure that adequate quantity of material is available in the identified areas.
Accordingly, detailed soil and material investigations were studied thru trial pit test data
conducted along the selected locations of the project road. The main focus of the test data
study was to determine the mechanical characteristics of:
� Sub soil along the existing alignments
� Existing subgrade/crust material
Methodology Adopted
� The methodology that was adopted to achieve the aforementioned objective is detailed here
under:
� Sample trial pits at selected locations for subjected road (or where soil profile changed),
measurement of existing crust details and collection of subgrade soil sample and past data
study for similar roads in project territory.
� Sample Excavation of existing pavement crust material & collection of sample of subjected
project road.
� Laboratory tests on all samples collected from test pits along existing pavement structure and
trial pits.
Subsoil Investigation
Investigations along the existing Subsoil were carried out to assess the adequacy of the
pavement layers appropriate to present proposed subgrade strength, so that, the construction
requirement can be established to cater to the design traffic. Objectives of investigation also
included the evaluation of the soil composition, characteristics, by means of laboratory tests.
The subsoil characteristics such as the soil classification, their index properties of plasticity,
liquidity index, their moisture content, will evaluated with the help of trial pits along project
corridor in zigzag manner. The collection of soil samples along with test results is attached
herewith. The following test parameters were analyzed with few soil samples:
� Index properties of grain size analysis and Atterberg`s limits
� Soaked CBR test
� Laboratory moisture density characteristics Standard Proctor Compaction
58
Package-143(Old-76A)
From actual test data and valuable suggestions from MCGM officials this pavement design is
prepared to take further footsteps as early as possible.
CBR Considerations
In accordance with trial pit test data , CBR values from test results is ranges from 6%
To determine unique CBR for pavement design, the 90 th percentile CBR value as per IRC:
37-2012(Clause No. 5.1.1.2,pg.10 and Annex
range of 6% to 8% .By considering existing available compacted subsoi
8% is considered for further design process.
Design Traffic for Pavement
Traffic constitutes an important parameter in the pavement design process. As passenger
vehicular movements and commercial vehicular movements are noted all
roads. The prediction of traffic intensity is available from traffic survey count. The Standard
Axles (MSA) for 15 years design period is done. Table
traffic for project road, which is adopted by appl
design of Flexible Pavement.
Commercial vehicles per Day
In accordance with IRC: 37, more than 3
design .The following vehicles are considered in commercial
calculations.
Survey Design Report
From actual test data and valuable suggestions from MCGM officials this pavement design is
prepared to take further footsteps as early as possible.
In accordance with trial pit test data , CBR values from test results is ranges from 6%
To determine unique CBR for pavement design, the 90 th percentile CBR value as per IRC:
2012(Clause No. 5.1.1.2,pg.10 and Annex-IV,pg. 66 and 67) is determined ,Which is in the
range of 6% to 8% .By considering existing available compacted subsoi
8% is considered for further design process.
Design Traffic for Pavement
Traffic constitutes an important parameter in the pavement design process. As passenger
vehicular movements and commercial vehicular movements are noted all
roads. The prediction of traffic intensity is available from traffic survey count. The Standard
Axles (MSA) for 15 years design period is done. Table represents only Commercial Vehicular
traffic for project road, which is adopted by applying suitable lane distribution factor for unique
design of Flexible Pavement.
Commercial vehicles per Day
In accordance with IRC: 37, more than 3 tones laden weight vehicles are considered for
design .The following vehicles are considered in commercial vehicle category for design
Survey Design Report
From actual test data and valuable suggestions from MCGM officials this pavement design is
In accordance with trial pit test data , CBR values from test results is ranges from 6% to 8%.
To determine unique CBR for pavement design, the 90 th percentile CBR value as per IRC:
IV,pg. 66 and 67) is determined ,Which is in the
range of 6% to 8% .By considering existing available compacted subsoil the effective CBR
Traffic constitutes an important parameter in the pavement design process. As passenger
vehicular movements and commercial vehicular movements are noted all along the project
roads. The prediction of traffic intensity is available from traffic survey count. The Standard
represents only Commercial Vehicular
ying suitable lane distribution factor for unique
laden weight vehicles are considered for
vehicle category for design
59
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
� Light Commercial Vehicle
� Two Axle Truck
� Three Axle Trucks
� Multi Axle Trucks
� Other like EME, rollers etc.
CVPD
Vehicle Types ADT
LCV 68
2 Axle Truck 6
3 Axle Truck 8
Multi Axle 0
Total Vehicles 82
Initial Traffic
For purpose of design, only the number of commercial vehicles of having gross vehicle weight
of 30 KN or more & their axle loading will be considered (as per Clause 4.1.2, Page 06 of
IRC-37:2012). For the computation of initial traffic value individual total from above Table is
adopted for this segmental Road.
Lane Distribution Factor
As the side strip lane is outer most part of roadway .Most of the traffic plays along main
carriageway, the side strip lane is supporting lane caters considerable less volume of traffic.
This segmental road is proposed to improve with available side strip width, so for pavement
design, 0. 75 lane distribution factors is considered for bi-directional traffic (Clause 4.5.1, iv,
and Page 8 and 9 of IRC: 37-2012).
60
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Growth Rate
The vehicle category wise traffic growth rate is normally arrived by studying the past trends in
traffic growth, present traffic & road network scenarios and future growth rates based on
econometric analysis. In the present situation, a maximum common average growth rate
CAGR of 5% is assumed as recommended by IRC (Clause 4.2.2, Page 6 of IRC: 37-2012).
Design Period
The design life of 15 years has been considered for design of pavements for total length.
Design Traffic and Pavement Thickness
The design traffic is calculated in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles to be
carried during the design life of the road. It requires the estimation of initial commercial
vehicles per day, lateral distribution of Traffic, traffic growth rate, the design life and the
vehicle damage factor (number of equivalent standard axle for commercial vehicle) to convert
commercial vehicles to standard axles. The commercial vehicles per day presented in Table no
.1 are the initial traffic which is assumed thru concrete road design study to analyze
Commercial vehicle per day in the year when the road is operational. The following formula is
used as per IRC -37, 2012(Clause 4.6.1, Page 9 of IRC: 37-2012).
A=P (1+r) x
Where:
A= Traffic in the year when the road is operational
r= Traffic Growth rate - assumed as 5% p.a. in this case.
x= number of years for road to be operational – in this case 1 years
P= Number of Commercial Vehicles as per Last Count – in this case 82
A= P (1+r) x
A= 82 * (1+0.05)1
= 86
61
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Design Parameters
Sr. No. Parameter Abbreviatio
n
Value Source
1) Number of Commercial
Vehicles as per Last
Count
P 82 As per Traffic count
2) Traffic in the year when
the road is operational
A 86 From Calculation
3) Traffic Growth rate r 0.05 (Clause 4.2.2, Page 6
of IRC:37-2012)
4) Design period n 15
5) Lane distribution factor D 0. 75
6) Vehicle damage factor F 3.67 As per axle load
count survey.
1.50 IRC recommends
1.5VDF For traffic up
to 150 CVPD & 3.5
FOR 150 TO 1500
CVPD,hence Max
VDF assumed AS
2.50
7) CBR for Sub Soil CBR subsoil
6.0% to
8.0%
From Trial pit test
data,
8) Effective CBR CBR
effective
8.0% Clause 5.2, Page 11
of IRC: 37-2012
The following equation has been used to calculate the cumulative no of Standard axles to be
catered for in the design in terms of MSA.
62
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
N = 365 x [(1+r) n – 1] x A x D x F
r
= 365x [(1+0.05)15 – 1] x 86 x 0. 75 x 1.50
0.05
= 1.04 Say 2, Adopted 5 msa for safe design
From plate 6 as per IRC 37-2012 pages 27, it is observed that for MSA 10 required crust
thicknesses is 515 mm for CBR effective 8%. The Detail composition of crust is computed by
visualizing following graphical representation.
Crust Thickness for Pavement Composition
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2 5 10 20 30 50 100 150
150 150200 200 200 200 200 200
225 250
250 250 250 250 250 250
5050
60 85 100 100 115 135
2025
4040 40 40
5050
GSB G.BASE DBM BC/SDBC(Upto 5 MSA)
Pa
ve
me
nt
Th
ick
ne
ss
in
mm
Traffic in MSA
PLATE 6 (CBR 8%)
63
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Crust Composition
Sl. No Layer Thickness(mm)
1) Bituminous concrete(BC) 40
2) Dense bituminous macadam 75
3) Wet Mix Macadam (WMM) as A base 200
4) Granular sub base(GSB) as a sub base 200
Total crust thickness 515
64
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Source Material Report
Quarry Location
76A
Sr. No. Quarry Location
1 Metal Nandori
2 Murum Manikgarh
3 Sand Mul / Kothari River
Quarry Chart
65
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
Lead Statement Name of Work : Padoli – Datala–Dewada – Shioni – Hadasti – Rajura Road (76-A)
Sr. No.
Nature Of Material Lead (km) Locations Average
Lead
Lead Charg
es
Initial Lead
Charges
Extra Lead
Charges
Unit
Quarry Nandori Padoli/HM Plant Rampur Average
1 Metal below 40 mm For Concrete Work 70 0 70.00 0.00 70.00
- - Cum
2 Rubble 70 0 70.00 0.00 70.00 - - Cum
Quarry Mul / Kothari River Rampur Average
3 Sand 50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 - - Cum
4 Earth 5 Local 5 - 0.00 Cum
Quarry Manikgarh Padoli Rampur Average
5 Soft Murum 11.00 0 0 0.00 11.40 - - Cum
Chandrapur MIDC
Datal Padoli Rampur Average
6 R.C.C.Pipes 22 0 4.25 7.25 36.75 22.00 - - Rmt
7 Cement 22 0 4.25 7.25 36.75 22.00 - - M.T.
8 Steel 22 0 4.25 7.25 36.75 22.00 - 0.00 M.T.
Quarry Mumbai HM Plant (Padoli) Average
9 Plant (DBM/BC) 830 0 830 830.00 0.00 - M.T. Quarry Mumbai Padoli Rampur Average
10 Site (Tack Coat / Prime Coat) 848 0 830 865.50 847.75 0.00 - M.T.
11 Metal at Plant Side 33.70 0.00 - M.T.
12 Mix at work Site 35.00 0.00 - M.T.
66
Package-143(Old-76A) Survey Design Report
67