European Practice On Design&Construction of Concrete Pavements

European Practice on Design and
Construction of Concrete Pavements
XV Argentine Congress on Road Safety and Traffic, Mar del Plata, Argentina, 14-18 September 2009
L.J.M. Houben
26 October 2009
1
Road
Vermelding
and Railway
onderdeel
Engineering
organisatie
Outline
Design of concrete pavements
Overview aspects of European design methods
German design method (empirical)
Dutch design method (analytical)
Construction of concrete pavements
Rehabilitation Ring Road, Antwerp, Belgium
Innovative precast concrete pavement
26 October 2009
Europe
44 countries
26 October 2009
European Union EU
27 countries
area 4,000,000 sq km
population 500,000,000
Argentina
area 2,800,000 sq km
population 41,000,000
26 October 2009
Overview aspects of European design

methods
General
Design methods
Traffic loading
Concrete grade
Substructure
Concrete thickness
European standards
26 October 2009

methods
General
FEHRL Working Group ELLPAG
State-of-the-art reports (design, construction,
maintenance, rehabilitation, economics)
Long-life concrete pavements: well designed
and constructed, indefinite structural
pavement life, surface maintenance
26 October 2009

methods
10 European countries in ELLPAG:
Austria (A)
the Netherlands (NL)
Belgium (B)
Poland (P)
Czech Republic (CR) Spain (E)
France (F)
Switzerland* (S)
Germany (G)
United Kingdom (UK)
* non-EU
26 October 2009

methods
2 types of concrete pavements in Europe:
JPCP:
no reinforcement
contraction joints => slabs: square, 5 m
bars in joints, mostly sealed
CRCP:
mid-depth shrinkage reinforcement =>
pattern of transverse cracks
only longitudinal contraction joints
sometimes special wearing course (PAC)
26 October 2009

methods
Share of concrete pavements on main road
network:
35% in Austria, Belgium
25% in Germany
< 10% in other countries
Reasons: tradition, experience, subsoil,
investment vs. life-cycle costs
26 October 2009

methods
Design methods
No European design method
Each country own design method
Most countries: method mainly empirical
(addressed later: German method)
Exceptions: method mainly analytical in France,
the Netherlands (addressed later: the
Netherlands)
26 October 2009
10

methods
Traffic loading
Parameters:
maximum axle load (105 130 (B,E,F) kN)
standard design axle load (80 (UK) 130 (F) kN)
design period (20 40 years)
maximum cumulative traffic loading (ESALs)
axle load frequency distribution (NL)
Warning: legal limits is not reality (overloading!)
26 October 2009
11

methods
Concrete grade
Country
Age of testing
(days)
Concrete strength (MPa)

compressive
flexural tensile
indirect (splitting) tensile
Austria
28
35 / 40
5.5
Belgium
90
62.5
Czech Republic
28
25 / 35
3.5 4.5
France
28
2.7
Germany
28
30 / 37
The Netherlands
28
35 / 45
Poland
28
46
Spain
28
3.5 4.5
Switzerland
28
30
5.5
United Kingdom
28
4.5 - 6
26 October 2009
12

methods
Substructure
Base (+ sub-base) + subgrade
Subgrade: A:
G:
S:
F:
E:
26 October 2009
Ev2 35 MPa
Ev2 45 MPa
Ev2 = 22.5 45 MPa
Edyn 120 MPa (main roads)
cement-stabilised (main roads)
13

methods
Sub-base:NL: 0.5 m sand
UK: granular, CBR 15% if
subgrade CBR < 5%
Base: UK: cement-bound
F: cement-bound (main roads)
B: 200 mm lean concrete (main roads)
200 mm granular (other roads)
26 October 2009
14

methods
Base: E:
150 mm lean concrete (main roads)

200 400 mm granular (other roads)
A,G,P,S,NL: cement-bound or granular,
effect on concrete thickness
B,F,NL: asphalt layer (50 90 mm) below CRCP
26 October 2009
15

methods
Concrete thickness
JPCP and CRCP design example for:
5000 cv per day on design traffic lane
concrete: compressive strength 32 MPa
flexural tensile strength 4 MPa
indirect tensile strength 2.7 MPa
base modulus 100 MPa (confusion!)
26 October 2009
16

methods
JPCP
CRCP:
26 October 2009
B,F:
200 mm
E,NL,UK: 250 mm
17

methods
European standards (EN = European Norms)
Materials for concrete pavements
Functional requirements and test methods for
concrete pavements
Dowel and tie bars
Joint fillers and sealants
The 33 standards are listed in Appendix 1 of
paper
26 October 2009
18

Large scale experience over more than 100
years
In 70 and 80 much analytical work done by
prof. Eisenmann (TU Munich)
Structural design guidelines regularly revised
RStO 01 contains standard JPCP structures,
dependent on traffic loading and type of base
26 October 2009
19

RStO 01
26 October 2009
20

Type of road
Total no. of
equivalent
100 kN (10
ton)
standard
axle loads
on design
traffic lane
in design
period
26 October 2009
21

Type of base:
1.1, 1.2, 1.3 =
cementbound base
(high to low
quality)
2 = asphalt
base
3 = granular
base
26 October 2009
22

Total thickness
of non frost
susceptible
materials
(dependent on
location)
Concrete
thickness
Base thickness
Thickness base
+ concrete
Thickness non
frost susceptible sub-base
26 October 2009
23
Minimum Ev2
at top of
sub-base
Minimum Ev2
at top of
subgrade
26 October 2009
24

Ev2 from static plate load test with stiff
circular steel plate:
1.5 pa
Ev 2 =
y
where:
Ev2 = deformation modulus (MPa)
P
= applied maximum stress (MPa)
a
= radius of circular plate (= 150 mm)
y
= measured rebound (elastic) deformation
(mm) during unloading at 2nd load cycle
26 October 2009
25

Ev2 used for check on quality of construction!
Slab width w traffic lane width
Slab length l 7.5 m
Slab length l < 25 * slab thickness h
Ratio of slab length l and slab width w < 1.3
(based on analyses Eisenmann, limiting
temperature gradient stresses)
Practice: slab dimensions l*w 5*4 m
26 October 2009
26

In transverse contraction joints: coated nonprofiled steel dowel bars (diameter 25 mm,
length 500 mm), mid-depth in concrete,
spacing 250 mm (main roads)
In longitudinal contraction joints: profiled
steel tie bars (diameter 20 mm, length 800
mm), 3 per slab length, at 2/3 of concrete
depth, central 1/3 part coated
26 October 2009
27

1st version: 1982
Only JPCP
Wrong Westergaard-equation for traffic load stresses
Eisenmann-procedure for calculation of temperature gradient stresses
Axle load frequency distribution
Temperature gradient 0.05 C/mm together with 5% of traffic loads
2nd version: 1993
Only JPCP
Correct Westergaard-equation for traffic load stresses
Modified Eisenmann-procedure for calculation of temperature gradient
stresses
Axle load frequency distribution
Temperature gradient frequency distribution
26 October 2009
28

3rd version: 2005
JPCP and CRCP

Modified axle load frequency distributions and temperature
gradient frequency distribution, based on measurements in
2000/2001
Released as software package VENCON2.0 (in

Dutch)
26 October 2009
29
Dutch design method Flow chart

1. Traffic loadings:
Axle loads
Directional factor
Design traffic lane
Traffic at joints
2. Climate:
Temperature
gradients
3. Substructure:
Modulus of
substructure
reaction
4. Concrete:
Strength
parameters
Elastic modulus
6. Temperature gradient
stresses:
Eisenmann/Dutch method
5. Traffic load stresses:
Load transfer at joints
Westergaard equation
26 October 2009
7. Thickness plain/reinforced pavement:

Miner fatigue analysis
8. Additional checks
plain pavements:
Robustness (NEN 6720)
Traffic-ability at opening
9. Reinforcement of
reinforced pavements:
Shrinkage and temperature
Tension bar model
Crack width criterion
10. Additional checks

reinforced pavement:
Robustness (NEN 6720)
Traffic-ability at opening
Parameter studies
30
Dutch design method - Axle load

measurements (WIM)
26 October 2009
31
Dutch design method - Some axle load

frequency distributions
Axle load
group (kN)
Average
wheel load P
(kN)
20-40
Axle load frequency distribution (%) for some type of roads

Heavily loaded motorway
Normally loaded
provincial road
Rural road
15
20.16
24.84
49.38
40-60
25
30.56
32.45
25.97
60-80
35
26.06
21.36
13.66
80-100
45
12.54
11.12
8.05
100-120
55
6.51
6.48
2.18
120-140
65
2.71
2.70
0.38
140-160
75
1.00
0.83
0.38
160-180
85
0.31
0.19
0.00
180-200
95
0.12
0.03
0.00
200-220
105
0.03
0.00
0.00
Average nr. of axles
3.5
3.5
3.1
Overloaded axles (%)
12
10
26 October 2009
32
Dutch design method - Tire type

frequency distributions
Equivalent radius of tire:
a = b (0.0028*P + 51) [mm]
Type of tire
Parameter b
Frequency distribution (%)

roads
public transport
bus lanes
9.2
39
50
12.4
38
50
Wide base tire

(super single)
8.7
23
Extra wide wide

base tire
9.1
Single tire
Dual tire
26 October 2009
33
Dutch design method Temperature

gradient frequency distribution
Temperature
gradient class
(C/mm)
Average temperature
gradient T
(C/mm)
Frequency
distribution
(%)
0.000 0.005
0.0025
59
0.005 0.015
0.01
22
0.015 0.025
0.02
7.5
0.025 0.035
0.03
5.5
0.035 0.045
0.04
4.5
0.045 0.055
0.05
1.0
0.055 0.065
0.06
0.5
26 October 2009
34
Dutch design method - Modulus of

substructure reaction
-4
k= 2.7145.10
C3
(C1 + C2.e
C5
+ C4.e
where:
C1 = 30 + 3360.ko
C2 = 0.3778 (hb 43.2)
C3 = 0.5654 ln(ko) + 0.4139 ln(Eb)
C4 = -283
C5 = 0.5654 ln(ko)
ko = modulus of subgrade/substructure reaction at top of underlying
layer (N/mm)
hb = thickness of layer under consideration (mm)
Eb = dynamic modulus of elasticity of layer under consideration (N/mm)
k = modulus of substructure reaction at top of layer under
consideration (N/mm); k 0.16 N/mm
26 October 2009
35
Dutch design method - Concrete

Mean flexural tensile strength, fbrm (in N/mm)
after 28 days for loadings of short duration:
fbrm = 1.3 [(1600 h)/1000)] [1.05 + 0.05 (fck + 8)]/1.2
Youngs modulus of elasticity, Ec (in N/mm):

Ec = 22250 + 250 fck
with 15 fck 65
where:
fck = characteristic cube compressive strength (N/mm)
after 28 days for loading of short duration
h = concrete thickness (mm)
26 October 2009
36
Dutch design method -Concrete

Properties after 28 days for loadings of short duration
Property
Concrete grade
C28/35 (B35) C35/45 (B45)
Characteristic cube compressive

strength, fck (N/mm)
35
45
Mean cube compressive strength,

fcm (N/mm)
43
53
Mean tensile strength, fbt (N/mm)
3.47
4.01
Mean flexural tensile strength, fbrm

(N/mm): h = 180 mm
h = 210 mm
h = 240 mm
h = 270 mm
4.92
4.82
4.71
4.61
5.69
5.57
5.45
5.33
Modulus of elasticity, Ec (N/mm)
31,000
33,500
26 October 2009
37
Dutch design method Traffic load stresses

Edge loading most critical:
. centre of longitudinal edge/joint (temperature gradient
stresses)
. wheel track at transversal joint (no. of load repetitions)
New Westergaard equation for circular tire contact area:
P =
3 (1 + ) Pcal
(3 + ) h2
Ec h3
4
1
a
+ 1.84 +
+ 1.18 (1 + 2 )
l n
4
3
2
l
100 k a
Due to load transfer W at joints/cracks:

W
Pcal = (1 1/ 2 W /100 ) P = 1
P
200
Values of W given in paper

26 October 2009
38
Dutch design method Temperature gradient

stresses
At edge due to positive temperature gradient t:
Case 1:
t = small: concrete slab fully supported:
Case2:
t = large:
concrete slab only supported at edges:
longitudinal edge:
transverse edge:
with:
2
L =L C
3
'
W' =W
2
C
3
hT
T =
Ec
2
T = 1.8*105
L' 2 / h
T = 1.8*10 5 W ' 2 / h
h
C = 4.5*
k T
Smallest stress of cases 1 and 2

26 October 2009
39
Dutch design method Thickness jointed

plain/continuously reinforced pavement
Thickness determined on basis of fatigue damage analysis
log Ni =
12.903 (0.995 maxi / fbrm)

1.000 0.7525 mini / fbrm
with 0.5 max / fbrm 0.833
Ni
= number of repetitions of wheel load Pi i.e. the traffic load

stress Pi until failure combined with a temperature
gradient stress Ti
mini = minimum flexural tensile stress (= Ti)
maxi = maximum flexural tensile stress (= Pi + Ti)
fbrm = mean flexural tensile strength (N/mm)
Design criterion: Palmgren-Miner fatigue damage rule:
26 October 2009
ni
=1
Ni
40
Dutch design method - Case Study

Structural design of plain concrete
pavement
Provincial 2-lane road, 7.5 m wide
Longitudinal joint, W = 70% (tie bars)
26 October 2009
41

Plain concrete pavement structure:
slab width 3.75 m, length 4.5 m
doweled transverse joints: W = 80%
250 mm cement-bound base, E = 6000
MPa, Wfree edge = 35%
500 mm sand sub-base, E = 100 MPa
subgrade E = 100 MPa <=> k0 = 0.045
N/mm3
k = 0.16 N/mm3 (maximum value)
26 October 2009
42

Default temperature gradient frequency
distribution
Traffic loading:
heavy vehicles 300 days per year
heavy traffic equally divided over 2 lanes
traffic growth 3% per year
3 axles per heavy vehicle
default frequency distribution of tire type
50% of heavy vehicles in centre of wheel track,
2% at free edge and 10% at longitudinal joint
26 October 2009
43

Variables in calculation:
concrete grade: C28/35 or C35/45
axle load frequency distribution: heavy or normal
no. of heavy vehicles per day on traffic lane in 1st
year: 10, 100 or 1000
design life: 20, 30 or 40 years
In all cases: centre of free edge dominant for thickness
design
26 October 2009
44

plain concrete pavement, effects of concrete grade and axle load
frequency distribution
concrete slab thickness (mm)
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
20
25
30
35
40
design life (years)

C28/35, heavy, 100
26 October 2009
C28/35, normal, 100
C35/45, heavy, 100
C35/45, normal, 100

45

plain concrete pavement, effects of concrete grade and number of
heavy trucks per day
280
270
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
20
25
30
35
40
design life (years)
26 October 2009
C28/35, heavy, 10
C28/35, heavy, 100
C28/35, heavy, 1000
C35/45, heavy, 10
C35/45, heavy, 100
C35/45, heavy, 1000

46

Concrete grade:
C28/35 instead of C35/45 requires 25 to 30 mm
more concrete
Axle load frequency distribution:
heavy distribution requires 10 mm extra concrete
Intensity heavy traffic:
10 times more traffic requires 10 to 15 mm more
concrete
Design life:
2 times longer life requires 5 to 10 mm more concrete
26 October 2009
47
Modern construction techniques

Discussed in paper
Not presented
26 October 2009
48
Rehabilitation Ring Road R1, Antwerp
26 October 2009
49
26 October 2009
50
26 October 2009
51

R1 opened in 1969
Length 14.2 km, incl. 690 m Kennedy
Tunnel and 1700 m Viaduct Merksem
6 radial motorways tying to R1
30 km access and exit ramps on interchanges
Asphalt pavement structure
26 October 2009
52

Partial rehabilitation in 1976 and 1977
2*4 through traffic lanes (2*3 in Kennedy
Tunnel)
Locally up to 7 lanes per direction
Asphalt pavement structure
26 October 2009
53

In 2004:
Up to 200,000 vehicles per day, incl.
25% trucks (harbour, through traffic)
Concrete pavement
in Kennedy Tunnel
seriously damaged
26 October 2009
54

Asphalt pavement
on main road R1
seriously damaged
(cracking, patching,
ravelling)
Surface run-off
problem
26 October 2009
55

Research into structural condition =>
major rehabilitation for safe, modern and
efficient road, service life 35 years, low
maintenance
26 October 2009
56

Rehabilitation works:
Eastern carriageway: June November 2004
Western carriageway: April September 2005
26 October 2009
57

Traffic regulation during rehabilitation:
closure all entrances/exits of local roads
2*2 lanes for through traffic on
carriageway not under construction
1 lane for through traffic to/from
interchanges with radial motorways
very extensive communication to road users,
also in neighbouring countries
Result: hardly any traffic jams
26 October 2009
58

Temporary
premanufactured
bridges in
parallel
city ring
road,
to be
used by
local
traffic
26 October 2009
59

Choice of type of pavement:
on ramps of interchanges: asphalt pavement
main Ring Road R1:
- alternatives: asphalt pavement and CRCP
- Life Cycle Cost analysis: NPV about equal
- Multi Criteria Analysis: CRCP slightly better
- choice: CRCP
- exceptions: Kennedy Tunnel: JPCP
Viaduct Merksem: asphalt
26 October 2009
60

Recycling of materials:
Existing asphalt pavement recycled (large
quantities, saving on raw materials, reduction
construction traffic outside works site):
asphalt partly in new asphalt mixes and
partly in new cement-bound asphalt
aggregate base
lean concrete base in new granular sub-base
26 October 2009
61

Structural design CRCP:
Design according
to Belgian
guidelines
Asphalt interlayer
between CRCP
and base
26 October 2009
62

Exposed aggregate concrete surface
Concrete:
stone gradings 4/7, 7/14 and 14/20 mm;
% 4/7 mm 20% of total granular mix
% sand as low as possible
water/cement-ratio < 0.45
cement content > 400 kg/m
air-entraining additive
26 October 2009
63

Total % reinforcement (l + t): 0.74%
Longitudinal: steel bars BE 500 S, diameter 20
mm, spacing 0.18 m, length 14 m, lap
0.7 m, skewed splice pattern
Transverse: steel bars BE 500 S, diameter 12
mm, spacing 0.7 m, angle 60, supported
by chairs fixed in asphalt interlayer
In longitudinal construction joints: tie bars,
diameter 16 mm, spacing 0.8 m
26 October 2009
64

General arrangement of reinforcing steel
26 October 2009
65

Transverse + longitudinal reinforcement + lap
longitudinal reinforcement bars
26 October 2009
66

End of CRCP:
End movements due to temperature changes:
restrain through expensive transverse
anchoring lugs; applied for auxiliary traffic
lanes (no movements of CRCP on main road)
accommodate in one or more expansion
joints with neoprene joint profile (bridges);
applied on main road between CRCP and
adjacent asphalt pavement
26 October 2009
67

Anchorage lugs
26 October 2009
68

Expansion joint
26 October 2009
69

Construction:
Eastern carriageway: 140 calendar days
Western carriageway: 150 calender days
Main road: 16 hrs/day, 7 days/week
Kennedy Tunnel: 24 hrs/day, 7 days/week
Also: 170 km storm water sewers and
drainage pipes, 9 utility tunnels below the
road, many bridges
26 October 2009
70

Temperary haul road over entire project
Two plants on works site (recycling, concrete)
Many construction phases, both longitudinally
and transversally
CRCP on main road and JPCP in Kennedy
Tunnel: 2 lanes or 1 lane plus shoulder
CMI HVW 2000 slipformpaver, width 10 m
26 October 2009
71

Construction JPCP in Kennedy Tunnel
26 October 2009
72

Construction CRCP on main Ring Road
26 October 2009
73

Construction CRCP on main Ring Road
26 October 2009
74

Sawing longitudinal contraction joint
Drilling holes
for tie bars in
longitudinal
construction
joint
Filling longitudinal construction joint

26 October 2009
75

In service CRCP
26 October 2009
76

Modieslab:
modular type of precast concrete pavement
structure, developed in the Netherlands,
especially suited for weak subsoils
exhibiting settlements
only precast concrete elements (constant
quality, construction independent on
weather conditions)
26 October 2009
77

designed as a bridge with short spans
(structural reinforcement)
twinlayer porous concrete wearing course for
traffic noise reduction
26 October 2009
78

Test pavements:
in 2001 at rest areas along motorway A50:
functional properties
in 2002 and 2003 at Delft University of
Technology: LINTRACK Accelerated Load
Testing and analyses for structural capacity
Test results described in Appendix 3 of paper
26 October 2009
79

In 2007 full-scale test section (100 m) in bypass
in junction between motorways A2 and A12
A12
A2
26 October 2009
80

Slab dimensions
l*w = 7.2*3.6 m
Driven precast
concrete foundation
piles with headers
Twinlayer porous
concrete:
30 mm top layer,
grading 2/8 mm
55 mm bottom layer,
grading 2/11 mm
26 October 2009
81

Construction of test section
26 October 2009
82
26 October 2009
83
26 October 2009
84
Innovative precast concrete

pavement
Measured functional properties
Required
Measured
Deceleration during emergency break
> 5.2 m/s
7.1 m/s
Friction coefficient
> 0.4
0.51 0.57
Ravelling (rolling surface abrasion test) < 20 grams
1.7 grams
Permeability
15 seconds
< 20 seconds
Noise level reduction at 100 km/h
6 7 dB(A)
Evenness
very good
Mid 2009, after 2 years in service ( 40,000

vehicles per day, incl. 15% trucks): no damage
26 October 2009
85
26 October 2009
86
Dutch design method - CRCP

Design tool
for
reinforcement:
reinforced
tension bar
model
IV
Nsy
N
l
Nx
III
II
Ncr
(EA)s,cr
ts
N
(EA)cs
0
26 October 2009
cr
l/l
fdc
sy
87

In phase II, increasing obstructed deformations
(due to further shrinkage and low temperatures)
result in increasing number of cracks, so
decreasing distance between the cracks, while
the crack widths remain constant.
Would the CRCP ever reach the completed crack
pattern (phase III), then further increasing
obstructed deformations result in increasing
crack widths at constant number of cracks.
26 October 2009
88

The pavement never should arrive in phase IV
where increasing deformations result in yield of
the reinforcement steel.
To prevent this, the percentage of longitudinal
reinforcement should always be greater than a
certain minimum percentage.
The reinforced tension bar model has been
validated on recently constructed CRCPs on the
motorways A5 and A50 in the Netherlands.
26 October 2009
89

In practice a CRCP remains in uncompleted crack
pattern (phase II).
After cracking the mean crack width wom in phase II is:
0.85
wom = 2 [(0.4 / (fcm Es)) s,cr (s,cr n cr)]

where:
fcm = mean cube compressive strength after 28 days for
loadings of short duration
= diameter of reinforcement steel bars
s,cr = tensile stress in steel bars in crack just after cracking
cr = tensile stress in concrete slab just before cracking
n = Es / Ec
26 October 2009
90

The maximum crack width wo,max in phase II is:
wo,max = so wom wall
where:
so = factor to include the variation of the crack width;
in phase II: so = 1.3
= factor to take care of loadings of long duration or cyclic
loadings:
for s 295 N/mm: = 1.3
3
for s > 295 N/mm: = 1 / (1 9 s 10

wall = maximum allowable crack width
26 October 2009
-9
91

The allowable crack width wall is:
wall = 0.2 kc (mm)
where:
kc = c / cmin
with c
(1 kc 2)
= actual concrete cover (mm) on
reinforcement steel
cmin = minimum concrete cover (mm) on
reinforcement steel: cmin = 35 mm
In practice c > 70 mm kc = 2 wall = 0.4 mm

26 October 2009
92
Maximum crack width

wo,max vs. percentage of
longitudinal reinforcement (steel bars
= 16 mm) for 250 mm
concrete C35/45
maximum crack width (mm)
Minimum percentage of longitudinal reinforcement to

prevent yield of steel bars = 16 mm:
C28/35: o,min = 0.41%
C35/45: o,min = 0.47%
1
0,9
0,8
0,7
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
e = 0 mm (w-all = 0.40 mm)

e = 10 mm (w-all = 0.40 mm)
e = 25 mm (w-all = 0.40 mm)
e = 35 mm (w-all = 0.40 mm)
e = 50 mm (w-all = 0.40 mm)
e = 80 mm (w-all = 0.21 mm)
0,4 0,45 0,5 0,55 0,6 0,65 0,7 0,75 0,8

percentage of reinforcement (%)
Allowable crack width 0.2-0.4 mm (cover); emax = 25 mm

26 October 2009
93

Required percentage of longitudinal reinforcement
as function of eccentricity e for steel bars = 16 mm
and = 20 mm in 250 mm concrete C35/45
For e = 0:
= 16 mm:
= 0.62%
= 20 mm:
= 0.65%
50
eccentricity e (mm)
The greater e,
the smaller
40
30
16 mm
20 mm
20
10
0
0,4
0,45
0,5
0,55
0,6
0,65
0,7
percentage of reinforcement (%)
In VENCON2.0: emax = 25 mm
26 October 2009
94

Structural design of both doweled plain
and continuously reinforced concrete
pavement
Provincial 2-lane road, 7.5 m wide
Longitudinal joint, W = 70% (tie bars /
transverse reinforcement)
26 October 2009
95

Plain concrete pavement structure:
slab width 3.75 m, length 4.5 m
doweled transverse joints: W = 80%
250 mm cement-bound base, E = 6000
MPa, Wfree edge = 35%
subgrade E = 100 MPa <=> k0 = 0.045
N/mm3
26 October 2009
96

Continuously reinforced concrete pavement
structure:
slab width 3.75 m, rebars FeB 500 with diameter
= 16 mm at mid depth (e = 0 mm)
transverse cracks: W = 90%
50 mm asphalt interlayer, E = 7500 MPa
250 mm cement-bound base, E = 6000 MPa,
Wfree edge = 35%
subgrade E = 100 MPa <=> k0 = 0.045 N/mm3
26 October 2009
97

Default temperature gradient frequency
distribution
Traffic loading:
heavy vehicles 300 days per year
heavy traffic equally divided over 2 lanes
traffic growth 3% per year
3 axles per heavy vehicle
default frequency distribution of tire type
50% of heavy vehicles in centre of wheel track,
2% at free edge and 10% at longitudinal joint
26 October 2009
98

Variables in calculation:
concrete grade: C28/35 or C35/45
axle load frequency distribution: heavy or normal
no. of heavy vehicles per day on traffic lane in 1st
year: 10, 100 or 1000
design life: 20, 30 or 40 years
In all cases: centre of free edge dominant for thickness
design
Calculated minimum thickness the same for plain and
continuously reinforced concrete
26 October 2009
99

plain concrete pavement, effects of concrete grade and axle load
frequency distribution
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
20
25
30
35
40
design life (years)

C28/35, heavy, 100
26 October 2009
C28/35, normal, 100
C35/45, heavy, 100
C35/45, normal, 100

100

plain concrete pavement, effects of concrete grade and number of
280
270
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
20
25
30
35
40
design life (years)
26 October 2009
C28/35, heavy, 10
C28/35, heavy, 100
C28/35, heavy, 1000
C35/45, heavy, 10
C35/45, heavy, 100
C35/45, heavy, 1000

101

continuously reinforced concrete pavement, effect of number of
concrete slab thickness

(mm) or distance between
rebars (mm)
300
250
200
150
100
20
25
30
35
40
design life (years)
26 October 2009
thickness C28/35, heavy, 10
distance rebars C28/35, heavy, 10

102

Concrete grade:
C28/35 instead of C35/45 requires 25 to 30 mm
more concrete
Axle load frequency distribution:
heavy distribution requires 10 mm extra concrete
Intensity heavy traffic:
10 times more traffic requires 10 to 15 mm more
concrete
Design life:
2 times longer life requires 5 to 10 mm more concrete
26 October 2009
103

European Practice On Design&Construction of Concrete Pavements

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

European Practice On Design&Construction of Concrete Pavements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

European Practice on Design and

Construction of Concrete Pavements

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Concrete strength (MPa)

indirect (splitting) tensile

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

150 mm lean concrete (main roads)

B,F,NL: asphalt layer (50 90 mm) below CRCP

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

Overview aspects of European design

German design method (empirical)

German design method (empirical)

German design method (empirical)

German design method (empirical)

German design method (empirical)

German design method (empirical)

German design method (empirical)

German design method (empirical)

German design method (empirical)

Dutch design method (analytical)

2nd version: 1993

Dutch design method (analytical)

JPCP and CRCP

Released as software package VENCON2.0 (in

Dutch design method Flow chart

7. Thickness plain/reinforced pavement:

10. Additional checks

Dutch design method - Axle load

Dutch design method - Some axle load

Axle load frequency distribution (%) for some type of roads

Average nr. of axles

Overloaded axles (%)

Dutch design method - Tire type

Frequency distribution (%)

Wide base tire

Extra wide wide

Dutch design method Temperature

Dutch design method - Modulus of

Dutch design method - Concrete

Youngs modulus of elasticity, Ec (in N/mm):

Dutch design method -Concrete

Characteristic cube compressive

Mean cube compressive strength,

Mean tensile strength, fbt (N/mm)

Mean flexural tensile strength, fbrm

Modulus of elasticity, Ec (N/mm)

Dutch design method Traffic load stresses

Due to load transfer W at joints/cracks:

Values of W given in paper

Dutch design method Temperature gradient

Smallest stress of cases 1 and 2

Dutch design method Thickness jointed

12.903 (0.995 maxi / fbrm)