We10 ard deviation for tlic of 0.35 ané 0.45 for iid and flexible pvemens, respectively. 2.1.4 Envirdnmental Elects ‘The environment cen affect pavement performance ia sal yoy, Tempera and mois changes an have an eet on ty sengt, dumbiiy, and load-arrying capacity of lhe pavement and roadbed aterhls. Another major environmental impact is the direct effect roadbed Swelling, pavement blowups, frost heave, disintegration, ec, can have o@ loss of riding quality aid setvicesbiliy. Additiona effects, such a5 aging, drying,jand overall material deteriors- tion due to weathering, are considered in this Guide only in terms oftheir inherent influence gn the pave- ‘ment perfoimance prediction models. “The actual treatment ofthe effects of seasonal tem- perature ani moisture changes on material properties is discussed in Sect 2.3, “Material Properties for Structural Design” This section provides ool} the ri- teria necessary for guantfying the pot requirements for evaluating waded swing aad fron acave. Tf either of thse can lead to significant loss in service- ability or fide quality during the analysis period, then ft (they) should be considesed in the design analysis for all paversent structaral types, except perhaps aggregate surfaced roads. As serviceabilty- based models are developed for such factors 3s pave- rent blowups, den they may be added to the design procedure. ‘The objective ofthis step is. produce a graph of serviceability loss versus tins spch as that illustrated in Figure 2.2. As described in Part I, the service- ability loss dve to environment muit be added to that ‘esting from cumulative axle louds. Figure 2.2 indi- cates thatthe environmental loss is a result of the summation of: losses from botti ‘swelling. jand frost heave. The Chart may Be used to éstimate the service- abit loss at intermediate periods, €g., at 13 years the Joss is 0.73. Obviously, if only swelling or only frost heave is considered, there will bé only ohe curve ‘on the graph. 'The environmental sbrviceability logs is evaluated in detail in Appendix G, “Treatment of Roadbed Swelling and/or Frost Heave in Design.” j2.2, PERFORMANCE, CRITERIA 2.2.1" Serviceabitity ‘The éervitdability of a’pavement is defined as its ability to serve-the type of traffic (automobiles and Design of Pavement Structures tracks) which ve the fciliy. The primary measure of feovicesbilty ie the Present Serviceablty Inde (PSD, which ranges from Q (impossible road) to 3% (parte rnd). The basic design philosophy of this Guide is the serviceability-performance concept sbhich provides a means of designing @ poveme bhsed on a specific total traffic voluine and 2 mini ‘mum level of serviceability desired at the end ote performance period. Scoston ef the Ionest allowable PSK or terminal sericea index (p) is based on te lowes inte that will be tolerated before rehsbiition, res ig oemsroton bcs ee. ney a 28 or higher is suggests for desiga|of major bg rays and’ fo highway with lesser fai vlumes One erterin fo ideniying a rinimum level of so feesiity my be esbished on the basis of POD secepiance. Following are genera! guielines for mi in eyels of p,'obtained from studies in connectibs th ty AASHO Road Test (4): ‘Terminal Percent of People Serviceability Level Stating Unacceptable 3.0 12 25 35 20, 85 For relatively sninor highways where economis dictate that te inal capital outlay be kept at mii frum, itis suggested thet this be accomplished by. {educing the design period othe total iraffie voluat Tather than by designing for a termine serviceabitiyg Jews than 2.0. Since the time at which 2 given pavement struct reaches is terminal serviceability depends on trl ‘Yolume and the original or inital serviceability ‘some consideration must also be given to the selecti Of pe (Ut should be recognized thatthe p, values ob tered atthe ASHO Rosd Test were .2 for flexible pavements and 4.5 for rigid pavements.) ‘Once pe and pare established, the following equ tion should be applied t0 define the total change i serviceability index: APSI = py — ‘The equation is applicable t6 flexible, gid, and ee. _regate-surlaced roads,en 6 = os g Total Loss, 10.73) : APStgwuen ate g i ae 3 LT Frost Heave oe toss, 2 APSha 3 z a 8 [4 ‘Sweting Loss. DPSleyy 02 rt 00 ° 5 noite 20 ‘Timo (years) Figure 2.2.°° A’ Coiiceptal Bxasiple of the Bavironmental Serviceabilty Loss Versus Time Graph that may be Developed for a Specific Locationme q22 Allowable Rutting performance criterion for ‘ageregate!surfaced roads. wurface pavements, no design model suitable for in- Teporedon inf his Geide ie svble this in. I eee 2.2.3 Aggregate Loss ‘For aggregate-surficed roads, an additions! con- em is the aggregate loss dive w0 raffle and erosion When aggregate lors occurs, the pavement structure ‘thinner and ‘the Joad-carrying oapicity is duced. This reduction of the pavement structure ckness increases the rate of surface deterioration. 7 Toren aggregate los in the procedure, itis neces- fag exit (0) he tol eens of aggregate will be lost during the design period, and (2) the fainimmum thickness of aggregate that is required to ‘amaintainable working surface forthe pavement ruc. : ‘Unfortunately, there is very litte information avail Je today to predict the rate of apgregate loss, Below {pan enaniple of prediction equation developed with mited data'on fectiohs experiencing greater than 50 percent thick trafid (15, J GL = 0.12 + 0.122307) ‘lied GL = total aggregate loss in inches, and. LT = number of loaded trucks in thousends ‘A second equation, which was developed from a recent study in Brazil on typical rural sections, can be ‘employed by the user to determine the input for gravel fos (25, 76): Design of Pavement Stricures oL= (B/25.4)((004SLADT + 3380.6/R + 0.4576) where GL = aggregate loss, in inches, during the period of time being considered, B = number of bladings during the period of time being considered, LADT = average daily traffic in design lane (for one-tane road use total traffic in both directions), R= average radius of curves, in feet, and G absolute value of grade, in pereent. ‘Another equation, developed throbgh = British study done in Kenya, is more applicable to areas where there is very Bite truck activity and thus the fey pis ose by cs. Sing i eqnton (Gelow) is for annual gravel loss, the Stal gravel loss {GL) would be estimated by multiplying by the nom bef of years inthe performance period: q AGL = (TIT? + 50) x f(4.2 +0927 + 0.889% + 1.88V0) where AGL = annual aggregate loss, in inches, T= annual waffic volume in both directions, in thousands of vehicles, R anual rainfall, in inches, VC = average percentage gradient of the road, and F = 037 for Ineritic gravels, = 043 for quanzitic gravels, (008 for volcanic gravels, and 059 for coral gravels. It should be noted that there are serious drawbacks. with all the equations shown here; therefore, when} ‘ever possible, local information about aggregate 1oss should be,used as input to the procedure, 2.3. MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN 2.3.1 Effective Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus ‘As discussed previously in this Part and Part I, the @ basis for materials characterization in this Guide is