Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Phu Thien Phat Limited is the sole producer and supplier of hydraulic road binder in Viet
Nam. The binder represents the new generation of hydraulic binder to replace Portland
cement. The binder is an alkali-activated pozzolan system based on coal fly ash; coal fly ash
remains a waste product from power generation. Phu Thien Phat Limited have funded a
three year programme to develop design guidance for road construction in Viet Nam;
structural and foundation layers have been created from soil bound with hydraulic road
binder. The design guidance has been developed based mainly on UK and EU experience.
The mixtures produced are hydraulic bound mixtures (HBMs); road design relates principally
to, but not limited to, the minor rural road network. Two types of soil have been defined in
Viet Nam, Suitable Soils and Marginal Soils. Suitable soils are as dug coarse sands and
gravels with specific limitations on grading and Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index; Marginal
Soils are blends of alluvial soil and medium sands which are commonly found in the plains of
Viet Nam. Single structural layer pavements have been developed that have a surface
formed by stone dressing and bitumen seal or 3cm of cold proprietary asphalt. A simple
linear elastic response model has been used to calculate structural layer thickness for
different foundation bearing capacities and vehicle loading conditions. Vehicle loading has
been divided into mixed traffic flow with light rigid chassis commercial vehicles and private
cares, and private cars only. Traffic loading has been sub-divided into occasional vehicle
movements through to high vehicle movements. Design Tables are provided from the output
of the modelling. The output data in terms of structural layer thickness has been found to be
wholly consistent with similar data produced in the UK based on observation of the
performance of such roadways. The structural design life of roads is 20 years; the service
life of a road surface will relate to the type of surface applied, a dressed and sealed surface
or a cold asphalt surface. Guidance is also provided on the production and construction of
pavement and foundation layers. It is believed that the work presented in this paper has the
potential to form national guidelines using this particular form of sustainable low energy
construction technology.
The authors wish to acknowledge the invaluable support provided by Nguyen Vu, Director, Phu Thien Phat Limited
Introduction
Roads are layered systems formed by a pavement structure over a foundation.
A pavement structure is formed by a base course and surface. The surface of a road
requires remaining stable under all weather conditions and provide friction for the safe
movement of vehicles. A road surface may be formed by the surface of the base course, or
by one or two material layers as shown in Figure 1; a single layer is called the surface
course, a two layer system is a binder course and surface course. The base course reduces
the vertical contact stress from vehicle wheels to values within the capability of the soil
foundation; the base course reduces vertical stress by shear strength, and flexural strength
where the layer is a bound aggregate mixture.
Surface
Base course
Surface course
Binder course
Base course
Base course
Foundation
Foundation
Road surface is
surface of base course
Foundation
Road surface
is single layer
Road surface is
two-layer system
The foundation to a road is formed by a sub-base over a natural or reconstituted soil; the
natural or reconstituted soil is called the subgrade. The surface of the subgrade is called the
formation; a formation creates the line and profile of a road. The process of creating the
formation is called earthworks; earthworks may involve cutting and trimming an existing soil,
or it may involve fill operations and the creation of an embankment. The bearing capacity of
a subgrade is measured empirically by the characteristic California Bearing Ratio (CBR); the
ratio is expressed in percent. Where the bearing capacity of a subgrade soil is low, generally
less than 5 percent CBR, an additional layer may be constructed called the capping layer. A
capping layer is excavated soil or imported low-grade material that improves the bearing
capacity of a weak subgrade. Where a capping layer is used the surface of the capping layer
defines the formation, the surface of the existing soil then becomes the sub-formation. The
sub-base creates a stiff platform for the movement of construction traffic and a surface on
which to build the pavement; the sub-base also acts as a drainage layer ensuring a stable
and low moisture condition within the base.
Sub-base
Formation
Formation
Embankment
Embankment
Sub-formation
Cutting
Capping layer
Capping layer
(1)
(4)
Practical values of HAsphalt range from 180mm with long-life pavements down to 100mm with
roads with a traffic loading of 3msa and less, as shown in Figure 2.1 of HD26/06.
Foundation design
The bearing capacity of a foundation has a significant impact on the performance of a road.
The use of hydraulic bound mixtures for the sub-base layer of a foundation creates a
condition that prohibits the vertical compressive strain at formation being used as a
pavement design criterion. Vertical compressive strain was related to deformation that
accumulated at formation level with traffic loading. Semi-rigid hydraulic bound sub-base, and
bases, cannot deform in the manner of fully flexible pavement construction. As a
consequence of the increased use of hydraulic bound sub-bases the design approach with
the foundation is to control foundation stiffness. The design criterion is Foundation Surface
Modulus. Foundation Surface Modulus is the ratio of applied surface stress to recovered
strain. The design criterion is a composite value of foundation response from what is a multilayered system. The Foundation Surface Modulus is an equivalent stiffness value treating
the foundation a half-space.
(5)
ff=c.fc
(6)
Where, E is dynamic elastic modulus in GPa, ff is flexural strength in
MPa, fc is compressive strength in MPa and a, b and c are material
constants.
Table 2 in TRL615 shows values for the constants in equations (5) and (6) for HBMs
including gravel and crushed rock aggregate. The values of constants used with low energy
HBMs in TRL611 are those for gravel aggregate: a=0.773, b=0.0301 and c=0.11.
TRL611 categorises roads on the basis of traffic loading in msa; the Road Type Categories
are shown in Table 5.1 of TRL611. The five Road Type Categories are:
0
1
2
3
4
over 30 to 80msa
over 10 to 30msa
over 2.5 to 10msa
over 0.5 to 2.5msa
up to 0.5msa
Flexible-composite road design charts are provided for Road Type 2 and foundation Classes
1 to 4; the design charts are shown in Figures 7.3 to 7.6 of TRL611. The design approach
follows that of TRL615 with a HBM base course and asphalt surface; however, for lower
Road Type Categories an alternative (reduced) construction specification is promoted.
2
Surface (mm)
4
Surface (mm)
Surface
dressing
40
100
Surface
dressing
40
100
Surface
dressing
40
100
n/r
n/r
n/r
n/r
n/r
n/r
300
280
270
250
n/r
240
220
200
200
n/r
280
260
240
220
n/r
240
220
200
180
n/r
180
160
150
150
n/r
240
220
200
190
n/r
200
180
160
150
n/r
150
150
150
150
Table 2: Adjustment factors for HBM Class (Replicate of Table 7.5 TRL611)
HBM strength Class
H1
H2
H3
H4
H5 (or superior)
Thickness adjustment
1.66
1.45
1.28
1.13
1.00
Clause 2.14 of HD26 has added additional guidance to that in TRL611. The additional
guidance suggests that adjustment factors may not be fully relevant; but, the additional
guidance relates only to cement bound mixtures (CBMs). The interpretation of experience is
that with HBMs using hydraulic road binders other than Portland cement the adjustment
factors in Table 7.5 of TRL611 should be retained until more experience is gained.
Suitable Soils
Suitable Soils are coarse sand and gravel soils. Data generated in Viet Nam has related to
coarse sand and fine gravel, which is a particle size range 0.6mm to 6mm. The mechanical
properties of HBM measured are compressive strength, static modulus and flexural strength.
Cured and soaked values of the three mechanical properties have been recorded for a range
of hydraulic binder content between 5 percent to 12 percent by mass of a mixture and for a
mass content of soil of particles less than 0.063mm within the soil mass between 20 percent
and 50 percent. Optimum mechanical values with the three characteristics are in the range
30 percent to 35 percent of particles less than 0.063mm in the soil mass.
The strength characteristics relate to a Class 22.5E hydraulic binder only, at this stage. For
each soil source a material design has included a range of hydraulic binder content and
strength measurements have been made with time up to 28 days, generally; some data has
extended time measurements. With each strength characteristic, two relationships have
been plotted relating strength with time and hydraulic binder content.
Strength
characteristics have also been correlated: flexural strength with compressive strength,
flexural strength with static modulus, and compressive strength with static modulus. Curing
of samples was sealed curing at 20C; soaked data was defined by additional samples being
seal-cured for 21 days then immersed in water maintained at 20C for 7 days. Raw laboratory
data was adjusted to achieve consistent relationships for strength with time and hydraulic
binder content, and between strength characteristics, thus enabling best estimates of 28 day
strength data to be recorded and best estimates of strength characteristic relationships.
Strength gain profiles show soil HRB including a strength Class 22.5E hydraulic binder to be
fast-setting as defined in Draft HD25. Ratio of 7 day to 28 day compressive strength values
range from 0.5 to 0.8; the ratio is dependent on compressive strength of the mixture. The
ratio of 7 day to 28 day compressive strength for cement bound mixtures (CBMs) quoted in
TRL615 as 0.84, which is consistent with Viet Nam data in terms of strength of mixture.
Strength characteristics of Suitable Soil HBM in Viet Nam
The relationship between strength characteristics of soil from Viet Nam has been plotted
using adjusted 28 day soaked data; this approximately translates to 360 day cured data as
used in TRL615 and HD26. Generally the relationship between flexural strength and
compressive strength is linear, as is the relationship between flexural strength and elastic
modulus. Non-linearity has been recorded with angular weak soils.
The relationship between static modulus and flexural strength has been created for 28 day
data with soils having a maximum particle size between 0.6mm and 6mm, with a range of
content of particles less than 0.063mm from 20 percent to 50 percent by mass of the soil,
and for a hydraulic binder content of between 5 percent and 12 percent by mass of the
mixture. The static modulus has been converted to dynamic modulus using the equation
quoted in TRL615,
Es=1.08Ed-9.07
(7)
The equation was derived for cement bound mixtures and can only be taken as an
approximation for soil HBMs. The static modulus range was found to be 0.1GPa to 0.3GPa,
which converts to a dynamic modulus range of 8.50GPa to 8.75GPa, the modulus range is
small given the range of hydraulic binder content and fines content (particles less than
0.063mm). The measured range of flexural strength was found to be from 0.20MPa to
0.75MPa, which is more significant. The data shows,
1. The quality of the mixtures, and Class of HBM, is affected more by hydraulic binder
content than fines content
2. As expected, the sensitivity of the relationship alters as the fines content increases
above 35 percent and the mixture moves from coarse particle control to fines control
3. The data suggests than the limit of fine content for suitable soils should be 20 percent
to 40 percent by mass of a soil
4. Mixtures with a hydraulic binder content in the range 8 percent to 10 percent by mass
of the mixture have a dynamic modulus of around 8.60GPa and flexural strength
around 0.55GPa
8.70
8.60
0.80
20 percent
percent
0.70
0.60
30 percent
percent
35 percent
percent
40 percent
percent
0.50
0.40
Fines content
Binder content
0.30
0.20
50 percent
percent
0.10
0
0.10
0.20
Static modulus (GPa)
0.30
Figure 3: Relationship between flexural strength and modulus for suitable soil HBMs
For the construction of rural Provincial roads the hydraulic binder content range of 8 percent
to 10 percent by mass of a mixture is taken as the most economic; for the hydraulic binder
content range structural design using soil HBM mixtures over the fines content range of 20
percent to 40 percent should be taken as Class H1.
For structural analysis using a simple linear elastic model the element (laboratory) dynamic
modulus can be taken as 8.60GPa; this has been translated to a layer modulus for design of
1.7GPa (0.2x8.6GPa); flexural strength for design should be taken as 0.19MPa (0.55x0.35,
where 0.35 is taken as KHyd).
With 8-10 percent strength Class 22.5E hydraulic binder by mass of a mixture Suitable
Soil HBM in Viet Nam is Class 1 HBM.
Suitable Soil HBM layer characteristics for structural design are dynamic modulus of
1.7GPa and flexural strength of 0.19MPa.
Suitable Soil HBMs may be used to create pavement base layers or single structural
layer, or they may be used to create the sub-base with foundations.
For soils with a maximum particle size greater, or smaller than the range 0.6mm to 6mm the
effect, from data analysis, will be equivalent, very generally, to a shift in binder content. An
increase in maximum particle size will broadly be equivalent to an increase in binder content;
High Flow 100. The design life of a road before structural intervention is required is 20
years.
Table 3: Composite pavement construction using Suitable Soils for base course
HBM base course thickness (mm)
(Content of Class 22.5E hydraulic binder 8-10 percent by mass of mixture)
61
82
43
61
82
43
195
245
1504
255
305
195
370
435
305
10
1704
220
1504
230
275
1704
340
405
275
15
1604
2104
1504
2154
255
1554
320
385
255
30
1904
2004
1704
1904
2254
1704
280
355
225
45
2104
2204
1904
2104
2204
1904
265
335
205
60
2204
2304
2004
2204
2304
2004
255
325
195
61
82
43
435
43
82
Existing
Soil
foundation
61
New
Soil
foundation
Existing
road
foundation
Foundation
CBR
(%)
405
385
355
335
325
Notes
1. Design thickness for standard commercial vehicles with LH chassis
2. Design thickness for overloaded commercial vehicles with LH chassis
3. Design thickness for commercial vehicles of limited gross weight
4. Base in compression
5. Grey filled boxes are the condition of base stress control on base thickness
Table 4: HBM pavement construction using Suitable Soils for base course
HBM base course thickness (mm)
(Content of Class 22.5E hydraulic binder 8-10 percent by mass of mixture)
61
82
43
61
82
43
225
275
1804
285
335
225
400
465
335
10
2004
250
1704
260
305
2004
370
435
305
15
1904
2404
1704
2354
285
1854
350
415
285
30
2204
2304
2004
2104
2554
2004
310
385
2554
45
2404
2504
2204
2404
2504
2204
295
365
2354
60
2504
2604
2304
2504
2704
2304
285
355
2254
Notes
1. Design thickness for standard commercial vehicles with LH chassis
2. Design thickness for overloaded commercial vehicles with LH chassis
3. Design thickness for commercial vehicles of limited gross weight
4. Base in compression
5. Grey filled boxes are the condition of base stress control on base thickness
61
82
Requires full pavement construction
43
82
Existing
Soil
foundation
61
New
Soil
foundation
Existing
road
foundation
Foundation
CBR
(%)
43
465
435
415
385
365
355
Table 5: Composite pavement construction using Marginal Soils for base course
HBM base course thickness (mm)
(Content of Class 22.5E hydraulic binder 8-10 percent by mass of mixture)
Foundation
CBR
(%)
82
43
61
82
43
61
82
43
61
82
43
1604
10
1904
New
Soil
foundation
15
1904
2104
1804
2204
30
2304
2354
2154
2304
2504
2154
2304
Existing
road
foundation
Existing
Soil
foundation
61
1604
1804
45
2304
2504
2304
2304
2504
2304
2304
60
2704
2704
2504
2704
2704
2504
1804
2704
2504
325
Notes
1. Design thickness for standard commercial vehicles with LH chassis
2. Design thickness for overloaded commercial vehicles with LH chassis
3. Design thickness for commercial vehicles of limited gross weight
4. Base in compression
5. Grey filled boxes are the condition of base stress control on base thickness
Table 6: HBM pavement construction using Marginal Soils for base course
HBM base course thickness (mm)
(Content of Class 22.5E hydraulic binder 8-10 percent by mass of mixture)
Foundation
CBR
(%)
82
43
61
82
43
61
82
43
61
82
43
1904
10
2204
New
Soil
foundation
15
2204
2404
2104
2504
30
2604
2654
2454
2604
2804
2454
2604
Existing
road
foundation
Existing
Soil
foundation
61
1904
2104
45
2604
2804
2604
2604
2804
2604
2604
60
3004
3004
2804
3004
3004
2804
2104
3004
2804
Notes
1. Design thickness for standard commercial vehicles with LH chassis
2. Design thickness for overloaded commercial vehicles with LH chassis
3. Design thickness for commercial vehicles of limited gross weight
4. Base in compression
5. Grey filled boxes are the condition of base stress control on base thickness
Elastic analysis
Comparison with TRL 611 design data can be made with Medium and Heavy commercial
vehicle flow, which translates to Type 4 and Type 3 UK roads. The comparison of data is
shown in Tables 7 and 8; in the comparison the interpretation of TRL 611 thickness values
has accounted for the thinner 3cm cold asphalt surface. The comparison of base thickness
values is reasonable suggesting the use of the simplified elastic model is valid and the
proposed Design Tables are valid as a starting point ahead of full performance experience.
355
Medium Flow
High Flow
CBR
5
10
15
30
45
60
6 TRL611
370
365
340
335
320
300
280
280
265
255
8 TRL611
435
430
405
400
385
365
355
350
335
325
4 TRL611
435
430
405
400
385
365
355
350
335
325
Notes
1. Values based on Table 7.4 TRL611 using adjustment factor of 1.66 for Class H1 HBM
Medium Flow
High Flow
CBR
5
10
15
30
45
60
6 TRL611
400
400
370
365
350
330
310
310
295
285
8 TRL611
465
465
435
430
415
400
385
360
365
355
4 TRL611
465
465
435
430
415
400
385
360
365
355
Notes
1. Values based on Table 7.4 TRL611 using adjustment factor of 1.66 for Class H1 HBM
Construction
Design Chart
Pavement loading
CBR (percent)
Thickness of base
Figure 4: Flow chart for use of Design Charts
Table 9: Composite pavement construction using Suitable Soils for base course
HBM base course thickness (mm)
(Content of Class 22.5E hydraulic binder 8-10 percent by mass of mixture)
Medium Flow
(400)
(200)
(100)
(tonnes)
(tonnes)
High Flow
(tonnes)
(tonnes)
22
11
22
11
22
11
22
1003
1053
1003
140
140
215
215
310
10
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
1153
1153
180
15
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
170
30
1003
1053
1003
1053
1003
1053
1003
1503
45
1003
1203
1003
1203
1003
1203
1003
1403
60
1053
1253
1053
1253
1053
1253
1053
1303
Existing
Soil
foundation
11
New
Soil
foundation
CBR
(%)
Low Flow
(600)
Existing
road
foundation
Foundation
Occasional Flow
Notes
1. Design thickness for standard private vehicles
2. Design thickness for overloaded private vehicles
3. Base in compression
4. Grey filled boxes are the condition of base stress control on base thickness
5. Red coloured figures are less than the minimum of 150mm base thickness
Table 10: HBM pavement construction using Suitable Soils for base course
HBM base course thickness (mm)
(Content of Class 22.5E hydraulic binder 8-10 percent by mass of mixture)
Occasional Flow
High Flow
(200)
(100)
(tonnes)
(tonnes)
(tonnes)
(tonnes)
22
11
22
11
22
11
22
1153
1353
1153
170
170
245
245
340
10
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
1453
1453
210
15
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
1253
1253
200
30
1203
1203
1203
1203
1203
1203
1203
180
45
1303
1503
1303
1503
1303
1503
1303
1803
60
1353
1553
1353
1553
1353
1553
1353
1603
Existing
Soil
foundation
11
New
Soil
foundation
CBR
(%)
Medium Flow
(400)
Existing
road
foundation
Foundation
Low Flow
(600)
Notes
1. Design thickness for standard private vehicles
2. Design thickness for overloaded private vehicles
3. Base in compression
4. Grey filled boxes are the condition of base stress control on base thickness
5. Red coloured figures are less than the minimum of 150mm base thickness
Table 11: Composite pavement construction using Marginal Soils for base course
HBM base course thickness (mm)
(Content of Class 22.5E hydraulic binder 8-10 percent by mass of mixture)
Medium Flow
(400)
(200)
(100)
(tonnes)
(tonnes)
High Flow
(tonnes)
22
11
1003
1053
1003
10
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
1153
1153
15
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
1003
30
1203
1353
1203
1353
1203
1353
1203
45
1353
1453
1353
1453
1353
1453
1353
1453
60
1453
1553
1453
1553
1453
1553
1453
1553
Existing
Soil
foundation
22
11
(tonnes)
11
New
Soil
foundation
CBR
(%)
Low Flow
(600)
Existing
road
foundation
Foundation
Occasional Flow
22
140
11
22
215
Notes
1. Design thickness for standard private vehicles
2. Design thickness for overloaded private vehicles
3. Base in compression
4. Grey filled boxes are the condition of base stress control on base thickness
5. Red coloured figures are less than the minimum of 150mm base thickness
Table 12: HBM pavement construction using Marginal Soils for base course
HBM base course thickness (mm)
(Content of Class 22.5E hydraulic binder 8-10 percent by mass of mixture)
Low Flow
Medium Flow
(600)
(400)
(200)
(100)
(tonnes)
(tonnes)
22
11
1003
1353
1303
10
1103
1303
1103
1303
1103
1453
1453
15
1203
1303
1203
1303
1203
1303
1253
30
1503
1653
1503
1653
1503
1653
1503
45
1653
1753
1653
1753
1653
1753
1653
1753
60
1753
1853
1753
1853
1753
1853
1753
1853
Existing
Soil
foundation
22
11
(tonnes)
11
New
Soil
foundation
(tonnes)
High Flow
Existing
road
foundation
Foundation
CBR
(%)
Occasional Flow
22
170
Notes
1. Design thickness for standard private vehicles
Elastic
analysis
2. Design thickness for overloaded private vehicles
3. Base in compression
4. Grey filled boxes are the condition of base stress control on base thickness
5. Red coloured figures are less than the minimum of 150mm base thickness
11
22
245
generation. Fine graded (unsuitable) soils require a reduced hydraulic binder content,
around 2-3 percent by mass of a mixture, to create diffuse cracking within a layer; the soil will
be stabilised and have enhanced bearing capacity but little structural strength.
Pavement construction
Pavement construction with minor roads involves two elements, earthworks to create the
formation, and pavement works that include the single structural layer base and sub-base,
and the surface. Earthworks are specified in MCHW Volume 1, SHW, Series 600,
Earthworks, and Volume 2, Notes for Guidance on the SHW, Series NG600; pavement
works relating to the single structural layer are specified in MCHW Volume 1, SHW, Series
800, Road Pavements- Unbound, Cement and other Hydraulically Bound Mixtures, and
Volume 2, Notes for Guidance on the SHW, Series NG800. Where a single layer cold
asphalt surface course is applied some guidance is provided in TRL Report TRL611, but the
system is proprietary with specific guidance on placement required.
Earthworks
Generally, with minor roads in Viet Nam soil pathways and roadways exist that are upgraded.
As such the creation of a new road formation involves profiling the existing pavement
surface, or cutting into the existing soil. The profile of the formation should create the profile
of the surface to the (new) pavement; the profile of the pavement surface should allow
surface water drainage through longitudinal profile and transverse profile, as a camber or
cross fall. MCHW, Volume 1, SHW, Series 600 Clause 616 defines the tolerance of the
formation profile, which is +20mm and -30mm, and the compaction of the trimmed formation,
which is by using a towed vibrating roller of at least 1800kg/m width of roll following Method 6
in Table 6/4 for a 250mm thick layer. Where the construction of the single structural layer is
not immediate then a 300mm protection layer is required where the process of cutting the
formation has started, described in Clause 603, or the process of cutting the formation is
postponed.
An assessment of the bearing capacity of the subgrade is required to enable the use of the
Design Tables. Subgrade soils in the plains of Viet Nam are silty soils or possibly sandy silts
with alluvial soils; where the existing subgrade drainage is poor the subgrade may only
achieve a 5 percent CBR bearing capacity. Where the bearing capacity of the subgrade is
measured the dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) should be used, as described in Draft
HD25. The DCP is a very simple and low cost tool that can be transported easily.
Where the subgrade bearing capacity is in the range 5 percent and 10 percent CBR and
Marginal Soil forms the single structural layer and the roadway requires being capable of
supporting the movement of commercial vehicles, the upper level of the subgrade requires
stabilisation, by insitu or juxta-situ method (dig out, mix and replace) to form a soil
improvement layer, or capping layer. Interestingly the characteristics specified for a cohesive
silty material able to be stabilised by hydraulic binder (Class 7E material) follow very closely
those defined for HBM in Viet Nam. The subgrade soil may comply with a Class 7E
Earthwork material, which is a standard material for stabilisation, or it may require a specific
material design approach and the use of a demonstration area. Clause 613 of MCHW,
Volume 1, SHW, Series 600 covers the requirements of a capping layer, and Clause 614
covers the stabilisation process of soils. Clause 614 allows the use of a towed vibratory
roller or pneumatic-tyred-roller (PTR); target compaction moisture content is defined by
Moisture Condition Value (MCV). The target MCV value with silty cohesive soils should be
less than 12. Along with the DCP the Moisture Condition Machine is a low cost and simple
site tool that avoids complex site testing.
Pavement works
The single structural layer is a HBM. The nature of the hydraulic binder in Viet Nam enables
a mixture to be classified as a Cement Bound Granular Mixture (CBGM), EN14227-1, or
Hydraulic Road Binder Bound Mixture (HRBBM), EN 14227-5. The soil grading in Viet Nam
is unlikely to comply with EN14227-1, rather the mixture created will comply with Clause 6.8
of EN 14227-5 HRRBM 4.
The processes involved in creating a HBM road layer in Viet Nam are unlikely to use a mixin-plant method of material production, rather a mix-in-place method, or variant of that
process, is used. The mix-in-place method is described in Clause 816 MCHW, Volume 1,
SHW, Series 800. Clause NG 813 MCHW, Volume 2, SHW, Series NG800 is the most
important in describing how best to create a HBM structural layer.
The minimum compacted HBM layer thickness should be 150mm, MCHW, Volume 2, SHW,
Series NG800 Clause NG813-7. Tables 9, 10, 11 and 12 show in red compacted layer
thickness values less than 150mm. For light loading defined by motorbikes and small private
cars the reduced single layer thickness value may be adequate; no single layer has been laid
less than 150mm in compacted layer thickness in Viet Nam to date.
Insitu layer production is by mobile pulverising equipment; in Viet Nam and to date the
addition of hydraulic binder is by 50kg bag of material. Two aspects are important.
Calculations require knowing the bulk moist mass density of the soil to get an accurate
estimate of bags per square metre of surface to achieve a binder content of 8-10 percent by
mass of a mixture. Secondly, the pulverising mixers in Viet Nam can reduce cohesive
materials to agglomerates but they have difficulty reducing the cohesive materials to a
maximum particle size less than 28mm as defined in MCHW, Volume 1, SHW, Series 600,
Clause 614-7. MCHW, Volume 2, SHW, Series NG800, Clause NG813-1 states that a
secondary process can be used to create an insitu mixture layer; this approach has
commonly been used in Viet Nam. Material is excavated from source and hydraulic binder
added to a stockpile of source material. Calculations are required to define the number of
whole 50kg bags of hydraulic binder to be added to a partially compacted and moist volume
of stockpile soil. The hydraulic binder is blended with the soil stockpile using a hydraulic
bucket. The process does cause degradation of the larger cohesive agglomerates; residual
oversize cohesive agglomerates are removed manually, or are broken down manually.
Water can be added to the stockpile until the MCV of the mixture achieves the target value
defined by laboratory design. The mixing process is continued until the stockpile has uniform
colour and there are no free volumes of hydraulic binder. The pre-blended mixture is then
transported to location and spread by dozer or grader. The mixture is then treated as an
insitu mixing process and a pulverising rotavator is used to ensure agglomerates are less
than 28mm, either by mechanical action, or again, by residual agglomerates being removed
manually.
MCHW, Volume 2, SHW, Series NG800, Clause NG813-7 states that pre-blended stockpiles
cannot be formed ahead of material placement unless a slow-setting hydraulic binder is
used, and then only in certain circumstances. A Class 22.5E hydraulic binder is a fast setting
hydraulic binder.
Layer compaction must be by vibrating roller and PTR, or by PTR using a 30kN wheel load.
Fine mixture will exhibit surface shear under the action of a vibrating roller. This may be
reduced with the use of a PTR, or the layer is laid +30/40mm thicker than required and the
surface trimmed to level; after trimming no further compaction is required with the layer. This
condition is described in MCHW, Volume 2, SHW, Series NG800, Clause NG813-18. The
trimming method does not eliminate the need for the use of a PTR.
A critical situation that exists in Viet Nam is the drying out of the surface of a layer of HBM
during compaction. This creates conditions where reduced strength will exist in the surface
of the layer and cause performance issues for a road. Where layer surface drying is possible
because of heat or wind then the surface should be wetted up during compaction, as
described in MCHW, Volume 2, SHW, Series NG800, Clause NG813-12.
With multiple layer construction full bond is required between layers. This requires the
surface of the lower layer to be moist, and there may be a need to scarify the surface of the
lower layer ahead of placing the upper layer, as described in MCHW, Volume 2, SHW,
Series NG800, Clause NG813-13.
Early trafficking of the base course depends on the surface construction. For an exposed
HBM base there should be no trafficking for 7 days; for immediate trafficking the Immediate
Bearing Index should be at last IPI40 for fine mixtures, or IPI50 for mixtures with at least 50
percent crushed hard aggregate, as defined in MCHW, Volume 2, SHW, Series NG800,
Clause NG813-16. Immediate Bearing Index is the cured (unsoaked) CBR value of the
compacted HBM.
Pavement surface
The surface to pavements of minor roads in Viet Nam have been a single 3cm layer of
proprietary cold asphalt, or surface dressing, or, in some cases, no surface treatment.
With a 3cm surface course the material is mixed on site using a rotating drum concrete
mixer. A blend of medium sand and fine gravel is mixed with a proprietary emulsified
bitumen produced by Colas. The mixture is spread by hand as with mastic asphalt;
compaction is by light weight PTR.
With a surface dressing, 10-20mm stone chipping are spread on the surface of a single
structural layer that has been partially compacted. The spread rate is around 60 percent
shoulder to shoulder. After final compaction and the embedment of the surface chippings the
surface is sprayed with the same emulsified bitumen used for the production of the 3cm cold
asphalt layer. The rate of spread of the emulsified bitumen requires being greater that
0.3kg/m2 of surface; in compliance with MCHW, Volume 1, SHW, Series 800, Clause 813-15.
Where no layer curing treatment is applied with roads carrying only motorbikes, people and
animals the surface the single structural layer requires being kept moisture until the full
strength of the mixture is achieved, by mist, fog, or light spray of water as described in
MCHW, Volume 1, SHW, Series 800, Clause 813-15. If this is not carried out there will be a
lack of surface durability.
Conclusions
The development of soil HBM for the construction of pavement and foundation layers in Viet
Nam has been shown to be viable. The work of the last three years with the construction of
sections of the minor rural road network has enabled the production of material and structural
design guidance that is consistent with and extends both UK and US current information.
Two classes of soil have been defined for the construction of rural minor roadways in Viet
Nam, Suitable Soils and Marginal Soils. Limits for the chemical, physical and mechanical
characteristics of the two Classes of soil have been defined, along with the mechanical
characteristics of soil-based hydraulic bound mixtures including strength Class 22.5E
hydraulic road binder. The hydraulic road binder is an alkali-activated pozzolan system
based on pulverised fuel ash. The soil HBMs are sustainable low energy materials with the
potential to reduce the cost and emissions associated with road provision and maintenance
in Viet Nam. Structural Design Tables have been produced for single structural layer
pavements in the manner promoted in the UK for low volume roads. The tables provide
structural layer thickness values for roads carrying mixed vehicle traffic and vehicle limited
traffic. Mixed vehicle traffic includes private cars and commercial vehicles with Light Rigid
chassis. Design vehicle loading for mixed traffic flows is a 6 tonne axle weight; structural
layer thickness values for an 8 tonne over-load and 4 tonne limited load condition have also
been provided. Where traffic loading is private car the design axle weight is 1 tonne, with
information on a 2 tonne over-load condition. Traffic volume is an input to the Design Tables
along with foundation bearing capacity. The structural design life of roads is 20 years; the
service life of a road surface will relate to the type of surface applied, a dressed and sealed
surface or a cold asphalt surface. A dressed and sealed surface will have limited service life
with medium and high mixed traffic flows, possible no more than 2 or 3 years. The work
presented in this paper has the potential to form national guidelines using this particular form
of sustainable low energy construction technology.