final year project, iga dan

8/12/2019 Final Year Project, Iga Dan

1/67


2/67


3/67

FINAL YEAR PROJECT 2011/2012

i | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

DECLARATION

I , IGA DAN, the undersigned do solemnly declare to the best of my knowledge and effort

that I did the final year project and that the work herein this report is entirely mine and hasnever been submitted by anyone to any institution for the award of academic awards. Any errors,

mistakes and omissions and others of that kind are of my personal failure and I welcome any

genuine criticisms

Signature Date ..


4/67


ii | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

DEDICATION

To my dear mummy, Miss Naluyima Mir iam who has sacrif iced and struggled to bri ng me

thus far ; without her I wouldnt have made it to this great institution.


5/67


6/67


iv | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ................................................................................................................................... I

DEDICATION ...................................................................................................................................... II

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................ ......................... .......................... ......................... ..........III

TABLE OF FIGURES: ...................................................................................................................... VII

TABLE OF TABLES: ........................... ......................... .......................... ......................... ................ VIII

ABSTRACT ........................ .......................... .......................... ......................... ........................... ......... IX

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Problem statement ....................................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Main objective .............................................................................................................................................. 2

1.4 Specific objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 2

1.5 Justification .................................................................................................................................................. 3

1.6 Scope of the study ........................................................................................................................................ 4

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................ 5

2.1 Benefits and selection of surfacing ............................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Low cost surfacing on low-volume roads ...................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Surfacing types available .............................................................................................................................. 6

2.3.1 Fog seal ................................................................................................................................................ 6

2.3.2 Priming ................................................................................................................................................ 62.3.3 Primer seal ........................................................................................................................................... 6

2.3.4 Sand seal .............................................................................................................................................. 7

2.3.5 Surface dressing ................................................................................................................................... 7

2.3.6 Slurry seal ............................................................................................................................................ 7

2.3.7 Otta seal .............................................................................................................................................. 7

2.3.8 Penetration macadam .......................................................................................................................... 8

2.3.9 Premixed gravel macadam/Gravel emulsified mix ............ ............. ............ ............. .............. ............ ..... 8


7/67


v | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

2.4 Previous studies done about sand seal designs............................................................................................. 8

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ........................ .......................... ......................... ...................... 10

3.1 Traffic Assessment ...................................................................................................................................... 10

3.1.1 Estimating Traffic Flows ...................................................................................................................... 10

3.1.2 Traffic forecasting .............................................................................................................................. 10

3.1.3 Determination of cumulative equivalent standard axles ..................................................................... 10

3.2 Inventory and general condition ................................................................................................................. 11

3.3 Structural Evaluation .................................................................................................................................. 11

3.4 Rainfall Assessment .................................................................................................................................... 13

3.5 Laboratory tests.......................................................................................................................................... 13

4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS:................................................................................................. 14

4.1 Structural Evaluation .................................................................................................................................. 14

4.1.1 DCP test results .................................................................................................................................. 14

4.1.2 Subgrade classification: ...................................................................................................................... 15

4.2 Traffic Assessment: ..................................................................................................................................... 15

4.2.1 Traffic count results ........................................................................................................................... 15

4.2.2 Cumulative Equivalent Standard Axle Loads ........................................................................................ 17

4.2.3 Traffic classification: ............. ............. ............ ............. ............. ............. .............. ............ ............. ....... 18

4.3 Rainfall Assessment .................................................................................................................................... 184.3.1 Weinert Value .................................................................................................................................... 18

4.4 Laboratory tests.......................................................................................................................................... 19

4.4.1 MDD results: ...................................................................................................................................... 19

Chainage 0+010 ........................................................................................................................................... 19

Chainage 0+110 ........................................................................................................................................... 20

Chainage 0+300:.......................................................................................................................................... 20

4.4.2 Gradation Results:.................................................................................................................................. 21

Chainage 0+010 ........................................................................................................................................... 21

Chainage 0+110 ........................................................................................................................................... 22Chainage 0+300 ........................................................................................................................................... 22

4.4.3 Plasticity Index results: ....................................................................................................................... 23

Chainage 0+010:.......................................................................................................................................... 23

Chainage 0+110 ........................................................................................................................................... 24

Chainage 0+300 ........................................................................................................................................... 25

4.5 Analysis: Layer thickness Design ................................................................................................................. 25


8/67


vi | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

CHAPTER 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMNEDATIONS ......................... ......................... 26

5.1 Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 26

5.2 Conclusions: ............................................................................................................................................... 26

5.2.1 Inventory of the existing road condition ............................................................................................. 26

5.2.2 Traffic usage of the road:.................................................................................................................... 265.2.3 Subgrade characteristics of the existing road ...................................................................................... 26

5.2.4 The design of the appropriate sand seal ............................................................................................. 27

New Pavement Structure............................................................................................................................. 27

New Pavement Structure............................................................................................................................. 28

Drainage ..................................................................................................................................................... 28

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 29

APPENDICES ......................... ......................... .......................... ......................... ........................... .... 30

Appendix I: DCP Test Data and Results: ........................................................................................................ 30

Layer boundary graphs and CBR graphs ............................................................................................................... 36

Appendix II: Kituza Coffee Research Meteorological Station Data ................................................................ 40

Appendix III Laboratory tests data: .............................................................................................................. 41

Appendix IV: Design Charts............................................................................................................................ 49

Appendix IV: Photographs of the project execution ...................................................................................... 55


9/67


vii | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

TABLE OF FIGURES:

FIGURE 1DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER ............................................................................................................ 12

FIGURE 2SUMMARY OF THE TRAFFIC COUNTS DATA USED TO OBTAIN THE ADT ...................................................... 16

FIGURE 3PROCTOR CURVE FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 .................................................................................................. 19



FIGURE 6SIEVE ANALYSIS FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 ................................................................................................... 21

FIGURE 7SIEVE ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR CHAINAGE 0+110 ..................................................................................... 22

FIGURE 8PLASTICITY INDEX RESULTS FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 .................................................................................. 23

FIGURE 9PLASTICITY INDEX RESULTS FOR CHAINAGE 0+110 .................................................................................. 24

FIGURE 10PLASTICITY INDEX RESULTS FOR CHAINAGE 0+300 ................................................................................ 25

FIGURE 11CBRVARIATION WITH THE CHAINAGE ALONG THE ROAD ....................................................................... 26

FIGURE 12DIAGRAMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE NEW PAVEMENT STRUCTURE.................................................... 27FIGURE 13LAYER BOUNDARIES AND CBRVARIATION FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 .......................................................... 36

FIGURE 14LAYER BOUNDARIES AND CBRVARIATION FOR CHAINAGE 0+110 .......................................................... 36

FIGURE 15BOUNDARIES AND CBRVARIATION FOR CHAINAGE 0+210 ..................................................................... 37




FIGURE 19HISTOGRAM SHOWING THE BASE SBR(%) ............................................................................................ 39

FIGURE 20ASSEMBLING OF THE DCPTEST EQUIPMENT .......................................................................................... 55

FIGURE 21APPLYING BLOWS TO THE SOIL TO GET PENETRATIONS ........................................................................... 55

FIGURE 22RECORDING OF PENTRATIONS ............................................................................................................... 55

FIGURE 23MEASURING OF THE DISTANCES FROM ONE CHAINAGE TO ANOTHER ....................................................... 55

FIGURE 24THE KIRA-KITO ROAD CONDITION......................................................................................................... 55

FIGURE 25RULER USED TO MEASURE THE PENETRATION ........................................................................................ 56

FIGURE 26SAMPLING TO OBTAIN SAMPLES FOR LABORATORY TESTS....................................................................... 56


10/67


viii | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

TABLE OF TABLES:

TABLE 1RECOMMENDED SPACINGS FOR DCP ........................................................................................................ 11

TABLE 2LABORATORY TESTS CARRIED OUT IN THE PROJECT EXECUTION................................................................. 13

TABLE 3SUMMARY OF THE DCPTEST RESULTS FOR THE DIFFERENT CHAINAGES..................................................... 14

TABLE 4SUBGRADE STRENGTH CLASSIFICATION .................................................................................................... 15

TABLE 5OBTAINING THE CUMULATIVE EQUIVALENT STANDARD AXLES LOADS ON THE ROAD................................. 17

TABLE 6TRAFFIC CLASSIFICATION BASING ON THE RANGE OF ESAS ....................................................................... 18

TABLE 7PROPOSEDNEW PAVEMENT STRUCTURE OF THE ROAD ............................................................................. 27

TABLE 8PROPOSED SURFACING OPTIONS ............................................................................................................... 28

TABLE 9THICKNESS AND REQUIRED CBRVALUES OF THE NEW PAVEMENT STRCUTURE.......................................... 28

TABLE 10UKDCPTEST RESULTS FOR ALL THE CHAINAGES (0+010TO 0+500) ....................................................... 30

TABLE 11MONTHLY EVAPORATION DATA FOR KITUZA COFFEE RESEARCH STATION................................................ 40

TABLE 12MONTHLY MAXIMUM FALL OF RAINFALL FOR KITUZA STATION.............................................................. 40

TABLE 13MONTLY RAINFALL TOTALS OF KITUZA STATION.................................................................................... 40

TABLE 14TEST RESULTS FROM MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY OF THE SOIL FOR CHAINAGE 0+010\ ................................. 41

TABLE 15TEST RESULTS FOR PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS TEST (BS1377:PART 2)FOR CHAINAGE 0+010 ................... 43

TABLE 16TEST RESULTS FOR THE MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIOS FOR CHAINAGE 0+210 ........................................ 44


TABLE 18TEST RESULTS FOR THE MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIOS OF THE SOIL FOR CHAINAGE 0+300 ............. ......... 47



11/67


ix | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

ABSTRACT

This report consists of a detailed proposed design of a sand seal for a low volume gravel road

case study being Kira-Kito road which stretches a distance of 1.5km. The main objective was to

design a sand seal. This was done by carrying out an inventory of the existing road condition,

determining the traffic usage of the road and evaluating the sub-grade characteristics of the

existing road.

In-situ field tests such as the DCP test, laboratory tests including; Moisture relations, Particle

size determination, maximum density test and plasticity index tests were some of the methods

that were used to analyse the structural strength and the existing material properties of the soil.

From the traffic counts the cumulative equivalent axles were obtained as 0.502 million ESA thusa traffic class of T2 LV6, the strength was observed to lie mainly from 15 to 29, hence a

subgrade classification of S5. From these results and others such as the maximum evaporation

and maximum rainfall were used to design the sand seal.


12/67


1 | P a g e Iga Dan 08/U/481 Bsc. Civil Engineering

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Low-volume rural roads in developing countries are vital to the socio-economic well being of

communities by providing access to schools, clinics, jobs, markets, neighboring communities

and the higher order road network. Therefore, whilst these roads tend to carry relatively low

levels of traffic, they play an important role in contributing to poverty alleviation, social and

economic development and the facilitation of schemes aimed at improving rural livelihoods.

(Done et al TRL, 2001).

Kira-Kito road is a low volume rural road. It is a gravel road, 10 km long located in Kira Town

Council, Wakiso district, Uganda. This road is a low volume national road which is under Kira

Town Council and is very important to Kira town council for access and mobility.

The rural poor in Kira need reliable access for affordable transport or services (both motorized

and non-motorized) such as bicycles, motorcycles, minibuses, buses, cars, whether owned or

hired. Even if a vehicle ride is too expensive for them, they will still depend on the transporters

that bring the medicine and teachers to the village, or carry farm produce to markets. The

challenge is therefore to provide and maintain this rural access for the low traffic currently in

use, on a sustainable basis within the limited resources available.

Many kilometers of this road in become impassable during the wet season cutting many

communities off from access to schools, markets, clinics and job opportunities. In addition, the

cost of operating vehicles on this road during the remainder of the year is disproportionately high

in relation to the service offered. Of equal or greater impact is the unsustainability of replacing

the gravel lost from these roads under environmental and traffic influences.

Using the conventional economic analysis and pavement design techniques, paving of this road

can not be justified. However, when environmental and the social benefits are considered,upgrading of this road carrying traffic as low as 20 vehicles per day to a sand sealed road can be

justified, particularly because large communities are affected.


13/67


14/67



c) To evaluate the sub-grade characteristics of the existing road

d) To design an appropriate sand seal to accommodate the traffic

1.5 Justification

There are serious constraints to the use of gravel in Kira due to factors relating to material

quality, material availability, climate, terrain, drainage provision and maintenance. There is

overall significant gravel loss and unsuitable deterioration. Thus, it is expected that the use of a

sand sealing would provide appropriate, economical and sustainable alternatives to natural gravel

in this region and the Uganda road sector.

This alternative, involving use of locally available sand may be constructed by small local

enterprises, using low-capital, labour based and light equipment methods. Communities could

also use some of the techniques to improve their own access. Thus the design of a sand seal is

very necessary to pave a way for the application of this sealing alternative.

The sealed surface will have lower maintenance requirements than gravel, not only in terms of

cost but also by reducing the need for imported heavy equipment to transport and compact. In

addition, a number of other strategic issues will be satisfied, which include;

Improved sustainability

Durability in the expected traffic and environmental conditions

Use of locally available materials

Techniques with low capital investment (limited or simple equipment needs) and

manageable by local contractors

Use of local labour and skills

Low volume roads tend to have a greater social and environmental impact as compared to high

volume roads because they connect small towns and rural communities, serve as farm-to-

market/forest-to-market roads, and provide links to parks and recreational areas hence need for

emphasis to be directed to these roads too, which is the reason for considering this project for my

final year.


15/67



1.6 Scope of the study

The study was carried out on Kira-Kito road and was limited to the first 600m from Kira Primary

School because of economy and to minimize on the challenge of ambiguity which may be caused

by too much work in a short period of time.

The study involved carrying out a traffic assessment of the area for five consecutive days at the

peak hours from 6 am to 9am, 12pm to 3pm and finally from 5pm to 7pm.

Soil samples were obtained from the road at 100m intervals to a depth of up to 500mm and from

the Right hand side, centerline and left hand side respectively.

This project was limited to design of a sand seal only.


16/67



CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction:

The literature review includes Include some introductory remarks about this chapter, some kind

of summary of what this chapter is about,

2.1 Benefits and selection of surfacing

The construction of an improved road surface can give a range of benefits. These benefits must

be compared with the costs of providing the surface. The primary benefits include:

Waterproof surface that is durable in both wet and dry weather;

Smoother surface (Sampson, 1995) and uniform appearance;

Decreased rate of deterioration resulting in a reduced maintenance requirement (gravel

typically loses 25 mm per year), (Nicholls and Spon, 1998); and

Increased skid resistance (Millard, 1993; TRL, 2000)

The decision to surface a road with any type of bituminous seal can depend on factors such as

the type and condition of the existing surface and strength of the pavement in relation to the

traffic it carries (Botswana, 1999). The quality and availability of materials also needs to be

consider along with the geometry of the road and the local climate (SABITA, 1992; TRL, 2000;

TRH, 1998).

Financial and economic factors are of course important in assessing whether to apply a surface

treatment to a road (Botswana, 1999). The initial construction cost and subsequent maintenance

costs must be assessed against the expected lifespan of the road and benefits to road users. What

may be thought lesser benefits such as riding quality, safety (from improved surface texture) and

environmental improvements (noise, dust) are no less important when justifying upgrading

unpaved roads and tracks.

Ultimately the local construction and maintenance capability must be considered and the

suitability of the construction technique for labour-based methods.

2.2 Low cost surfacing on low-volume roads

The justification (technical, economic, and environmental) for a surfacing on a road which

carries high levels of traffic is clear. However, there are considerable and growing arguments in

favor of extending the use of surfacings to roads with much lower traffic levels of less than 400


17/67



vpd (MELTC, 2011). For simple economic reasons, surfacings applied to low-volume roads will

tend to be low cost, although some cost/benefit analysis will always be useful.

Surfaced roads are particularly effective in reducing environmental damage. They can be used to

prevent dust pollution, particularly in towns and villages (Sampson, 1995, Greening et al, 1999).

They reduce the demand for increasingly scarce gravel materials and even in those areas where

materials are available they improve the environment through decreased borrow pit activity

(Rolt, 1995, Kenya, 1993). They also prevent the sedimentation of fine materials that result from

run-off of rainwater from un-surfaced roads (Sampson, 1995).

Finally, and most importantly, it is extremely important that rural roads provide all weather

access for the local community. In some circumstances the only way to ensure this is to provide

effective drainage and seal the road on, at least, some short sections of the road. If this is not

done then as the road continues to deteriorate it may reach a state where access may be totally

lost (Rolt, 1995).

2.3 Surfacing types available

2.3.1 Fog seal

Fog seals use bitumen emulsions and are used to enrich ageing bituminous surfacing and prevent

chipping loss. The fog seal is usually blinded with a layer of fines to prevent pick up by traffic

(ARRB, 1995; TRL, 2000).

2.3.2 Priming

Normally used prior to placing another surfacing for sealing small cracks and providing

adhesion. Priming waterproofs and reduces dust but lasts only a few weeks. Cut-back bitumens

are normally used but emulsions have been trialed, but the results are not yet known (ARRB,

1995) and morever, cut-back bitumens due to environmental concerns are no longer

recommended for use.

2.3.3 Primer seal

This is similar to a sand seal but is made to less rigorous specifications, is less durable having a

life expectancy of 1-3 years (Overby, 1982). It is normally constructed with a cut-back as the

binder but emulsions can be used in conjunction with small aggregate sizes (5 7mm), in fine

and warm conditions, when it provides good adhesion for the aggregate (ARRB, 1995).


18/67



2.3.4 Sand seal

This seal consists of first an optional prime coat (1mm); a bitumen layer (1.5mm, cutback

bitumen, emulsion) followed by a graded sand layer (3-5mm) which must then is compacted.

(Beusch et al, 1997). Performance can be improved if a second seal is applied after 3 months

and is best for traffic levels up to 400 vpd. A life of 4-5 years can be expected (van der Walt,

1979).

2.3.5 Surface dressing

Surface dressing comprises a thin film of bitumen sprayed onto the road surface and then

covered with a layer of stone chippings (Beusch et al, 1997). The thin film of binder acts as a

waterproofing layer preventing the entry of surface water into the road structure. The stone

chippings protect this film of binder from damage by vehicle tyres, and form a durable, skid-

resistant and dust-free wearing surface. It can provide an effective and economical running

surface for newly constructed road pavements. Roads carrying up to 1000 vehicles/lane/day are

successfully surfaced with multiple surface dressings (Overby, 1982).

2.3.6 Slurry seal

Slurry seals are laid cold and are a mixture of fine aggregates, Portland cement filler, bitumen

emulsion and additional water (BSI, 1984) (ASTM, 1990). When freshly mixed they have a thick

creamy consistency and can be spread to a thickness of 5 to 10 mm. They are often used over a

single surface dressing to produce a Cape seal. Slurry mixes are best made and spread by

purpose made machines but can be suitable for labour-based construction (Emery et al, 1994)

(SABITA, 1993) (Zimbabwe, 1998).

2.3.7 Otta seal

An Otta seal consists of a layer of binder followed by a layer of aggregate that is extensively

rolled into the binder using a pneumatic tyred roller or loaded trucks(Overby, 1982). It is

different to surface dressing in that a graded gravel or crushed aggregate containing all sizes,

including filler, is used instead of single sized chippings. It depends for its success on the

mechanism of the binder being squeezed up through the aggregate by the action of the rolling.

Due to the fines in the aggregate, 2 to 3 days of pneumatic-tyred compaction (rollers or traffic) is

required to fully coat all the particles. There is no formal design procedure but recommendations

based on case studies have been published (Overby, 1999).


19/67



2.3.8 Penetration macadam

Macadam is a paving technique developed by a Scottish Engineer called John Macadam at the

beginning of the 19 thcentury using broken stones of various sizes combined together and placed

in layers. Various developments of this technique are used today. Penetration macadam consists

of layers of broken or crushed stones of size up to 80mm, interspersed with applications of

heated bitumen to grout and seal the surface. It is laid as a waterproof surface on a previously

prepared roadbase. The effect is to achieve a matrix of keyed stones grouted and sealed with

bitumen to a depth of about 60 80mm. The process requires only a basic bitumen heater-

distributor and an 8-10 tonne deadweight roller. Labour methods can be used to place and spread

the materials. Applications of bitumen are high at 7 9 kg/m. Other types of bitumen surface

can achieve a durable waterproof surface with lower bitumen application rates. Alternative

bitumen emulsion surfaces can avoid the requirement for heating with corresponding safety

benefits.

2.3.9 Premixed gravel macadam/Gravel emulsified mix

Gravel aggregate is mixed with an anionic emulsion either by hand or in a small drum mixer

such as a portable cement mixer with the aggregate gravel specification the same as an Otta seal

(Balmaceda&Horak, 1997). After mixing, the material is spread on a primed road base and rolled

in the same way as an Otta seal. The surfacing is comparable to an Otta seal.

2.4 Previous studies done about sand seal designs

MELTC (Uganda) in conjunction with DANIDA under consultancy of TRL and PROME were

the first to carry out studies about Sand seals and work include; Development of training

modules, conducting training and establishment of demonstration sites for low-cost sealing of

roads in Uganda. The project entailed the following activities:

Prepare a training curriculum and training materials covering materials investigation,

appropriate design options for pavements and low-cost structures for labour-based sealed

roads, sealing procedures and techniques, site safety, maintenance of labour-based sealed

roads and any other information as the consultant may deem necessary for achieving the

training objectives;

Train trainers at MELTC,


20/67



Develop the necessary technical documentation (manuals) for use by local practitioners

including tender documents,

Develop quality control measures for the low-cost sealing of roads.

This study project is different from the work done under MELTC because it is aimed at

designing a sand seal for Kira-Kito road putting into consideration the local, topographical and

environmental conditions in Wakiso and will put into account the local available materials in or

near Mukono.

The Institutional Cooperation between Roads Department, Ministry of Works, Kenya and

Norwegian Road Research Laboratory (NRRL) carried out an appraisal study in Kenya on the

Low-cost Pavement which started in 1982, which was carried out by the Norwegian Road

Research Laboratory (NRRL) and Materials Branch of Ministry of Public Works. The initial

contracts for the project were in 1980 between the Ministry of Works, NRRL and the Norwegian

Agency for Development NORAD. The main objective of the Low-cost Pavement was to

provide specification for construction materials to be utilized on the low volume roads in the

regions without too good quality materials. It was intended that by utilizing local materials the

project would achieve road pavements (Sand seal inclusive) with both acceptable life expectancy

and reasonable maintenance costs. The construction of the trial section started in June 1983 on

the arrival of the first project co-coordinator. Preliminary investigations consisted of gravel and

hard stone surveys together with digging of test trenches. From August 1983 to August 1985 a

total of 16 trail sections were constructed. An additional 6 sections were located adjacent to the

already constructed sections in Kenya.


21/67



CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

Include a summary of what this chapter is about

3.1 Traffic Assessment

3.1.1 Estimating Traffic Flows

A 5-day classified traffic count was carried out along the road with the counts distinguishing

between vehicle categories basing on the MoWT road design manual which stipulates a period of

seven days; reason for carrying out only five days was because of consistency of results and

constraints in facilitation. The counts of the traffic were carried out in both directions and the

different vehicle categories included:

Non motorised traffic which included people (Children, adults)

Cars, including passenger cars, vans, minibuses taxis, pick-ups, 4WD vehicles

Buses, including medium and large buses above 24 passenger seats

Light trucks, including small and medium sized trucks with 2 axles.

Medium trucks, including larger trucks with 3 or 4 axles.

Heavy trucks, including trucks with more than 4 axles and articulated trucks

3.1.2 Traffic forecasting

In order to estimate the traffic that will use the road over its design life, a growth rate was

projected basing on Ministry of Works Manual and basing on the value of 4.5% per annum used

by MELTC in designing for low cost sealing options.

3.1.3 Determination of cumulative equivalent standard axles

In order to determine the cumulative equivalent standard axles over the design life of the road,

the following procedure was followed:

i. The daily traffic flow was determined for each class of vehicle weighed using the results

of the traffic survey.

ii. The average daily traffic flow for each class of vehicle was then obtained also.


22/67



iii. A forecast of the traffic flow for each class of vehicle was made so as to determine the

total traffic in each class that will travel over the road during the design life

iv. The mean equivalence factors of each class of vehicle were determined from the results

of an axle load survey.

v.

The products of the cumulative traffic flows for each class of vehicle over the design life

of the road and the mean equivalence factor for that class were then calculated and added

together to give the cumulative equivalent standard axle loading for each direction.

3.2 Inventory and general condition

Moving along the existing road, geometric data, shoulder condition data, side drain data,

and carriageway surface condition data was observed to be in a relatively good condition

since the road had just been regraveled and a few defects were observed which basically

constituted;

o Potholes,

o Oversize material,

3.3 Structural Evaluation

The structural assessment was carried out in situ by use of a dynamic cone penetrometer

(DCP) shown in figure 1 below. The spacing for carrying out the DCP test along the roadwas taken as 100m for the entire length of section of 500m because the section my

project is concentrating on is the first 100m thus wasnt necessary to carry out structural

assessment on the entire section.

The procedure of carrying out the DCP test was as per Dynamic Cone Penetrometer tests

and analysis, (Colin Jones, 2007)

The recommended spacings for conducting DCP tests are shown in Error! Reference

source not found.below.

Table 1 Recommended spacings for DCP

Objective Minimum Test Spacing

Routine testing for the rehabilitation of paved roads 500m or less

Areas of distress on paved roads 100m or less


23/67



Upgrading of gravel roads to sealed roads 500m or less

Design of spot improvements 50m or less

Adopted from TRL Project Report Number: PR/INT/277/04

Figure 1 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer


24/67



3.4 Rainfall Assessment

Annual rainfall estimates and the maximum evaporation data was obtained from Meteorological

Department, Ministry of land, water and environment and are shown in chapter 4.

3.5 Laboratory tests

Sampling was carried out concurrently as the DCP test was being carried out and approximately

35 kg were taken per point. This was to make sure that the material was enough to carry out the

necessary tests.

In the laboratory samples of the base material and the subgrade material were be tested for the

tests indicated in the laboratory except the California Bearing ratio because of many reasons

including:

DCP test gave us consistent values for the CBR and thus it was satisfactory to rely on

those results hence not very necessary to carry out the laboratory CBR

Lack of enough resources especially time as many tests were to be carried out and yet

CBR moulds were not easily accessible

The tests which were carried out included the following the procedures indicated in the British

Standards indicated and are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2 Laboratory tests carried out in the project execution

Laboratory Tests Standard

Compaction test BS 1377: Part 4: 1990

Moisture Content BS 1377: Part 2: 1990

Atterbergs Limits BS 1377: Part 2: 1990

Particle Size Distribution BS 1377: Part 2: 1990


25/67



4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS:

4.1 Structural Evaluation

4.1.1 DCP test results

The detailed test data obtained while carrying out the DCP test is shown in the Appendix 1 andthe test results can be summarised in the table 3 below obtained from the layer boundary and

CBR graphs in the Appendix 1

Table 3 Summary of the DCP test results for the different chainages

Chainage 0+010

No. CBR (%) Thickness(mm) Depth (mm) Position Strength coeff.

1 31 432 432 Base 0.07

2 8 139 571 Sub-base 0.06

3 22 127 698 Subgrade

Chainage 0+110


1 120 554 554 Base 0.14

2 45 134 688 Sub-base 0.11

3 24 231 919 Subgrade

Chainage 0+210


1 87 329 329 Base 0.13

2 13 117 446 Sub-base 0.08

3 19 353 799 Subgrade

Chainage 0+300


1 68 364 364 Base 0.12

2 10 120 484 Sub-base 0.07

3 20 320 804 Subgrade

Chainage 0+400No. CBR (%) Thickness(mm) Depth (mm) Position Strength coeff.

1 96 313 313 Base 0.14

2 26 217 530 Sub-base 0.1

3 20 268 798 Subgrade

Chainage 0+500


26/67




1 59 226 226 Base 0.11

2 37 344 570 Sub-base 0.1

3 29 241 811 Subgrade

4.1.2 Subgrade classification:

From the results of the DCP tests as analysed using the UKDCP software above, it was

established that the Subgrade strength class of the road was mainly lying from 15 to 29 thus the

subgrade class of the road from the specification given in the TRL road note 31 shown in the

table 4 below is S5.

Table 4 Subgrade strength classification

(MoWT Road Design Manual, 2010)

4.2 Traffic Assessment:

4.2.1 Traffic count results

The traffic counts were carried out for five consecutive days as shown in the traffic count sheets

appended to the document in appendix VI. The data was analysed as shown in the figure 2

below to obtain the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) indicated in the last column as the Mean per

day.


27/67



Figure 2 Summary of the traffic counts data used to obtain the ADT

6-9am 12-3pm 5-8pm

Mean

per

3hrs

mean

per

12hrs

6-9am 12-3pm 5-8pmMean

per 3hrs

mean

per

12hrs

6-9a m 1 2-3p m 5 -8p m

Mean

per

3hrs

mean

per 12hrs6-9am 2-3pm5-8pm

Mean

per

3hrs

mean

per

12hrs

6-9am 12-3pm 5-8pm

Mean

per

3hrs

mean

per

12hrs

Total mean per

12 hrs for 5 days

Pedestrians 218 91 175 161 645 255 101 173 176 705 223 105 200 176 704 193 132 202 176 703 122 124 134 127 507 3264

Bicycles 17 10 20 16 63 11 12 13 12 48 6 9 6 7 28 11 3 11 8 33 6 4 4 5 19 191

Motorcycles 133 107 156 132 528 130 98 172 133 533 152 112 140 135 539 174 127 211 171 683 132 143 121 132 528 2811

Saloon cars and taxis 42 33 43 39 157 37 42 39 39 157 39 37 41 39 156 51 31 56 46 184 23 42 21 29 115 769

Light Goods Vans:

(Pickups, 4WD)61 41 49 50 201 71 43 50 55 219 63 62 51 59 235 54 46 63 54 217 41 39 26 35 141 1013

Small Bus: Minibuses and

Matatus16 8 10 11 45 14 11 6 10 41 7 12 5 8 32 4 13 6 8 31 2 2 0 1 5 155

Medium Bus: Coasters 3 0 1 1 5 2 0 2 1 5 2 0 4 2 8 2 0 4 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 27

Buses

Light Single Unit Trucks:

Dynas and tractors5 18 4 9 36 3 14 7 8 32 7 21 3 10 41 5 11 10 9 35 11 13 16 13 53 197

Medium-Large Single Unit

Trucks: Lorries, fusos0 6 2 3 11 0 3 0 1 4 0 2 0 1 3 0 5 0 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 24

3 Hour Total 495 314 460 423 1692 523 324 462 436.3 1745 499 360 450 436.3 1745 494 368 563 475 1900 337 367 322 342 1368 8451

Vehicle Class

Traffic Tallying Form

Area/Town: Kira Town Council

Location: Kira Primary School 0+010

COUN

Project: Design of a sand seal for a low volume gravel road

Road: Kira-Kito Road

Name: IGA DAN 08/U/481

Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday


28/67



4.2.2 Cumulative Equivalent Standard Axle Loads

Table 5 obtaining the Cumulative Equivalent Standard axles loads on the road

Vehicle Class Axles Load/ kg

EALF(Axles/8160)

Numberper day

ESAL

Pedestrians 653Bicycles 38

Motorcycles 562

Saloon cars and taxis 1000 0.1225 154 19

Light Goods Vans:

(Pickups, 4WD)

2000 0.2451 203 50

Small Bus: Minibuses and

Matatus

3000 0.3676 31 11

Medium Bus: Coasters 4500 0.5515 5 3

Light Single Unit Trucks:Dynas and tractors 4000 0.4902 39 19

Medium-Large Single Unit

Trucks: Lorries, fusos

7500 0.9191 5 4

Buses 10000 1.2255 0

TOTAL 107

CESAL = ESAL 365 100R

1 + R100

x+y 1 + R100

yWhere

A= Total ESA / day

R= Traffic growth rate which is taken as 4.5% per annum

x= design life in years taken as 5 years

y= number of years before start of design life

= 107 365 1004.5

1 + 4.5100

10+1 1 + 4.5100

1= 501,512

CESAL= 0.502 MESAs


29/67



Thence the Cumulative Equivalent Standard Axle Loads applied on the road is 0.502 Million

ESAs

4.2.3 Traffic classification:

From the TRL road note 31, the traffic class is obtained depending on the number of Equivalent

Standard Axles as can be shown in the table 6 below

Table 6 Traffic classification basing on the range of ESAs

(MoWT Road Design Manual, 2010)

The traffic classification of the road is LV6 T2 as the CESALs is 501,512 ESA

4.3 Rainfall Assessment

Annual rainfall estimates and maximum evaporation data obtained from the Meteorological

Department is indicated in appendix II and the maximum evaporation in the hottest month was

found as 180mm and the average annual rainfall over the last five years was found as 1387.4mm.

4.3.1 Weinert Value

This value is computed from the equation below;

= 12 (MELTC, 2011)Where Ey is the evaporation in the hottest month of the year; in mm which

according to the Kituuza Meteorological centre data is found to be 180mm

and

Pais the annual precipitation; in mm which is 1387.4 mm


30/67



= 12 1801387.4

= 1.56

Thus the Weinert number is less than 4.

4.4 Laboratory testsThe laboratory results obtained from the testing of samples obtained from the road to ascertain if

the current material is suitable for re-use or modification or has to be removed entirely from the

road and new material imported is shown in the appendix III.

Three samples were obtained and thoroughly tested for the tests indicated in the methodology

and they are all indicated in the appendix III

4.4.1 MDD results:

Chainage 0+010

Figure 3 Proctor curve for chainage 0+010

Max. Dry Density (MDD) = 1,775 Kg/m3

Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) = 13.6 %

1700

1710

1720

1730

1740

1750

1760

1770

1780

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DryDensity(Kg/

m3)

Moisture Content %

Proctor Curve

Series1


31/67



Chainage 0+110

Figure 4 Proctor curve for chainage 0+110


Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) = 12.1%

Chainage 0+300:


Optimum Moisture Content OMC = 12.3%

1,500

1,520

1,540

1,560

1,580

1,600

1,620

1,640

1,660

1,6801,700

1,720

9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0

DryDensity(Kg/m3)

Moisture Content %

Proctor Curve

Series1


32/67



Figure 5 Proctor curve for Chainage 0+300

4.4.2 Gradation Results:

Chainage 0+010

Figure 6 Sieve analysis for chainage 0+010

1,560

1,570

1,580

1,590

1,600

1,610

1,620

1,630

1,640

1,650

1,660

1,670

9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0

AxisTitle

Axis Title

Proctor Curve

Series1

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000

Percentagepassing

Diameter of particles (mm)

Sieve analysis graph for chainage 0+010


33/67



Chainage 0+110

Figure 7 Sieve analysis results for chainage 0+110

Chainage 0+300

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000

PercentagePassing%

Diameter of particles (mm)

Sieve Analysis graph for sample from chainage 0+110

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000

Passing%

Diameter (mm)

Sieve analysis graph for chainage 0+300


34/67



4.4.3 Plasticity Index results:

Chainage 0+010:

Figure 8 Plasticity Index results for chainage 0+010

RESULTS

Liquid Limit ( LL ) = 48.5%

Plastic Limit ( PL ) = 34.6%

Plasticity Index ( PI=LL-PL ) = 13.9%

44.0

45.0

46.0

47.0

48.0

49.0

50.0

51.0

52.0

53.0

0 10 20 30 40 50

Moisturecontent

Number of blows


35/67



Chainage 0+110

Figure 9 Plasticity index results for chainage 0+110

RESULTS




42.5

43.0

43.5

44.0

44.5

45.0

45.5

46.0

0 10 20 30 40 50

Moisturecontent

Number of blows


36/67



Chainage 0+300

Figure 10 Plasticity index results for chainage 0+300

RESULTS




4.5 Analysis: Layer thickness Design

Basing on the following results obtained in from the tests carried out above the base following

design parameters were obtained;

The range of the Weinert value is less than 4,

The design cumulative equivalent standard axle loads (CESALs) was obtained as 0.502

MESAsthus traffic class of LV6 T2

The subgrade CBR was obtained in the range of 15-29.

30.0

31.0

32.0

33.0

34.0

35.0

36.0

37.0

38.0

0 10 20 30 40 50

Moisturecontent

Number of blows


37/67



CHAPTER 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMNEDATIONS

5.1 Summary

This chapter has put into consideration the tests carried out and the results obtained the with the

aid of design manuals and specifications, it has given the design suitable for this road of a sand

seal as can be shown below;

5.2 Conclusions:

5.2.1 Inventory of the existing road condition

The general condition of the road was in a very good condition thus in case of carrying out the

sand seal, there will be need of slight reshaping.

5.2.2 Traffic usage of the road:

From the traffic flow analysis the traffic class of the road obtained in the results section is T2 isLow Volume LV6 hence LV6 T2 as the CESALs is 501,512 ESA

5.2.3 Subgrade characteristics of the existing road

The in-situ CBR values of the subgrade are generally good. If in-situ CBR values obtained from

the DCP tests exceed 10% then the road foundation should be strong enough to carry traffic load

on low volume roads. Hence the fact that the CBR values are in the range of 15-29 then subgrade

is adequate and design Subgrade strength class S5. Below is figure 11 which shows the variation

of CBR for the subgrade and base;

.

Figure 11 CBR variation with the chainage along the road

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

CBR(%)

Chainage (m)

CBR values for DCP test

Subgrade

Base

Linear (Subgrade)

Linear (Base)


38/67



The CBR values for the base layer are of concern because, on low volume roads, the minimum

allowable soaked CBR is 40%. The results show that the in-situ CBR values obtained average

approximately 78% which is significantly higher than the minimum required soaked CBR; where

the values are very low such as at chainage 0+010 being 40 there is need for strengthening and

some modification may be necessary to improve the material characteristics.

5.2.4 The design of the appropriate sand seal

New Pavement Structure

Given the above traffic, Weinert number, subgrade and sub-base CBRs and using the design

chart in appendix III for N


39/67



From the laboratory tests, the material used for the construction of the Base and sub-base gives

desired properties of MDD, plasticity Index and gradation thus there is no need to import

material and in cases of shortage the borrow pits where the material was initially obtained can be

used to obtain more gravel material.

The proposed surfacing is as shown in the table 8 below:

Table 8 Proposed surfacing options

Material Surfacing Binder to be used

Quarry fines from

Kira Town Council

Sand Seal with Quarry fines Bitumen EmulsionK1-60 (80-100 Pen Base Bitumen)

River Sand Sand Seal Bitumen EmulsionK1-60 (80-100 Pen Base Bitumen)

New Pavement Structure

Given the above traffic, Weinert number, subgrade and sub-base CBRs and using the design

chart in appendix III for N


40/67



REFERENCES

Archondo-Callao, R.S. (1999). Paving of Unpaved Roads. Economically - Justified Paving Cost.

Infrastructure

BEUSCH A, HARTMANN P, PETTS R C, WINKELMANN P, (1997). Low cost road

construction in Indonesia - Labor-Based Road Projects in Manggaria District.

GIUMMARRA G (2001). Road Classifications, Geometric Designs and Maintenance Standards

for Low Volume Roads. Research Report AR354, ARRB Transport Research Ltd,

Vermont South, Victoria.

Guidelines for the Geometric Design of Very Low Volume Local Roads (ADT


41/67



APPENDICES

Appendix I: DCP Test Data and Results:

DCP test Data:

Table 10 UK DCP test results for all the chainages (0+010 to 0+500)

UK DCP Test Data SheetProject name Design of a Sand Seal for a Low Volume gravel Road; Case study: Kira-Kito Road

Test number 1 2 3

Chainage (km) 10 110 200

Location Carriageway Shoulder Carriageway

Lane number 0 0

Offset (m) 0 0 0

Direction

Zero error (mm) 11 11 11

Test date 17/04/2012 17/04/2012 17/04/2012

Remarks Left hand side Right hand side Centreline

Layers removed 0 0 0

Surface type Unpaved Unpaved UnpavedSurface moisture Dry Dry Dry

Surface thickness (mm)

Surface condition

Surface strength

coefficient

Base thickness (mm)

Base condition

Blows Depth (mm) Blows Depth

(mm)

Blows Depth

(mm)


42/67



0 32 0 25 0 17

1 42 2 37 1 28

2 47 2 42 1 34

2 56 2 46 2 41

2 63 3 52 2 46

3 75 3 55 3 50

3 86 5 65 5 58

3 97 5 76 5 63

3 110 5 90 5 69

3 120 5 105 5 80

3 134 5 110 5 93

3 147 5 135 5 110

3 158 5 150 5 124

3 172 5 163 3 135

3 185 5 175 3 145

3 198 5 186 3 153

3 212 5 199 3 160

3 226 5 215 3 169

3 241 5 243 3 175

3 260 2 264 3 181

3 282 2 278 3 189

2 303 2 290 3 195

2 328 2 300 3 205

2 345 2 310 3 213

2 359 2 320 3 222

2 371 3 334 3 234

2 384 3 343 3 248

2 399 3 350 3 267

2 412 3 356 2 280

2 426 3 360 2 294


43/67



2 443 3 364 2 308

2 465 5 370 2 324

1 490 5 373 2 340

1 526 5 377 2 360

1 566 7 380 1 386

1 582 7 382 1 419

1 590 10 389 1 442

2 604 10 397 1 457

2 615 10 406 1 470

2 626 10 424 1 485

2 634 10 443 1 495

2 645 10 465 1 507

2 654 10 487 1 520

2 663 10 520 1 530

2 672 5 540 1 542

2 680 5 565 1 555

2 690 3 583 1 569

2 699 2 595 1 584

2 709 2 607 1 600

2 619 1 615

3 635 1 630

3 655 1 645

2 666 1 660

2 679 1 674

2 689 1 690

2 699 1 704

2 710 1 718

2 721 1 729

2 730 1 742

2 740 1 755


44/67



2 750 1 768

2 760 1 783

2 769 1 795

2 779 1 810

UK DCP Test Data Sheet

Project name Design of a Sand Seal for a Low Volume gravel Road; Case study: Kira-Kito Road

Test number 4 5 6

Chainage (km) 300 400 500

Location Carriageway Shoulder Carriageway

Lane number 0 0

Offset (m) 0 0 0

Direction

Zero error (mm) 11 11 11

Test date (dd/mm/yyyy) 17/04/2012 17/04/2012 17/04/2012

Remarks Left hand side Right hand side Centreline

Layers removed 0 0 0

Surface type Unpaved Unpaved Unpaved

Surface moisture Very Dry Dry Moderate

Surface thickness (mm)

Surface condition

Surface strengthcoefficient

Base type

Base thickness (mm)

Base condition

Blows Depth (mm) Blows Depth (mm) Blows Depth (mm)

0 15 0 11 0 22

2 26 2 20 2 36

2 34 2 26 2 45

2 42 2 34 2 55


45/67



2 51 2 40 2 61

2 58 3 45 2 69

2 67 5 51 2 75

2 72 5 55 2 84

3 80 10 68 2 92

3 89 10 81 2 102

3 96 10 101 2 111

3 105 10 127 2 120

3 113 7 150 2 130

3 121 7 166 2 140

3 130 7 186 2 147

3 140 7 217 2 156

3 150 5 242 2 165

3 158 3 259 2 175

3 167 3 280 2 185

3 176 2 295 2 194

3 186 2 308 2 205

3 197 2 324 2 214

3 211 2 343 2 225

3 223 1 352 2 237

3 245 1 373 2 253

3 260 1 384 2 265

3 272 1 395 2 279

3 286 1 406 2 295

3 302 1 419 2 309

3 319 1 430 2 324

3 337 1 440 2 340

3 358 1 440 2 355

2 375 1 450 2 373

1 402 1 460 2 390


46/67



1 445 1 470 2 405

1 465 1 480 2 423

1 480 1 490 2 438

1 495 1 500 2 454

1 509 1 510 2 470

1 523 1 520 1 475

1 538 1 530 1 482

1 550 1 541 1 488

1 564 1 554 1 495

1 576 1 569 1 502

1 590 1 580 1 510

1 603 1 594 1 515

1 615 1 608 1 523

1 627 1 620 1 523

1 639 1 633 1 530

1 652 1 647 1 537

1 665 1 662 2 552

1 675 1 675 2 568

1 689 1 690 2 581

1 702 1 703 2 600

1 715 1 715 2 618

1 725 1 725 2 635

1 725 1 739 2 654

1 740 1 750 2 670

1 755 1 762 2 689

1 769 1 774 2 707

1 785 1 785 2 729

1 800 1 796 2 729

1 815 1 809 2 751

2 774


47/67



Layer boundary graphs and CBR graphs

Chainage 0+010:

Figure 13 Layer boundaries and CBR variation for chainage 0+010

Chainage 0+110:

Figure 14 Layer boundaries and CBR variation for chainage 0+110


48/67



Chainage 0+210:

Figure 15 boundaries and CBR variation for chainage 0+210

Chainage 0+300:



49/67



Chainage 0+400:


Chain age 0+500:

Figure 18boundaries and CBR variation for chainage 0+500


50/67



Histogram to indicate the Base CBR

Figure 19 Histogram showing the base SBR (%)


51/67



Appendix II: Kituza Coffee Research Meteorological Station Data

Long Term M ean (LTM ) Monthly Evaporation (mm) (PAN TYPE ....A........)

Table 11 Monthly evaporation data for Kituza coffee research station

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Mean 138 122 147 122 120 110 100 105 124 134 122 128

Highest 163 144 169 138 140 129 115 134 154 180 139 175

Lowest 87 101 124 113 107 94 76 78 95 104 111 97

Monthly Maximum Fall of Rainfall (mm)

Table 12 Monthly Maximum fall of rainfall for Kituza Station

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2007 24.0 17.0 29.5 31.0 30.3 45.0 16.5 26.2 55.5 54.0 37.0 30.5

2008 91.0 14.0 38.0 93.0 30.2 20.0 13.8 14.3 21.2 35.0 22.0 6.5

2009 19.0 25.0 16.0 34.0 37.0 12.0 19.0 38.0 32.5 58.0 53.2 31.5

2010 22.5 95.0 60.0 63.0 20.0 22.0 28.5 20.5 62.5 31.0 45.0 40.5

2011 15.0 16.0 35.0 30.4 25.5 7.8 18.0 54.0 29.5 30.6 58.0 68.0

Monthly Rainfall Totals (mm)

Table 13 Montly Rainfall totals of Kituza station

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2007 133.3 64.2 69.5 140.8 106.3 119.0 82.3 81.1 234.0 157.8 151.5 48.0

2008 154.4 47.2 191.9 348.2 103.3 33.3 39.1 43.7 83.4 184.8 82.4 17.3

2009 34.1 73.8 26.0 204.8 157.0 35.0 34.1 124.8 96.8 232.1 232.4 126.2

2010 51.5 273.3 258.5 191.1 104.5 70.8 47.8 48.4 118.1 110.2 111.2 110.2

2011 22.2 24.2 161.9 137.7 90.1 14.8 21.7 135.7 142.8 102.8 289.3 204.3


52/67



Appendix III Laboratory tests data:

Table 14 Test results from Maximum Dry Density of the soil for chainage 0+010\

DESIGN OF A SAND SEAL FOR A LOW VOLUME GRAVEL ROAD

Project Road: Kira-Kito Road

DATA SHEET FOR MOISTURE - DENSITY RELATIONS OF SOILS

USING 4.54 KG. RAMMER ( OMC & MDD TEST ) As per BS 1377:Part 4

Sample No: 1 Sampling Date: 17 -04-12

Source/Location of Sample: Kira Kito Testing Date: 25 -04-12

Km 0+100 LHS

Sample Description : Red Gravel Material Technician: Iga Dan

Proposed Use: Wearing C

Mass of mould (g): 5,120 Volume (cm3): 2,299

Specimen Number/Mould No. 1 2 3 4 5

Mass of mould+base+compacted specimen ( m2 ) 9,480 9,640 9,758 9,730 9,680

Mass of mould + base (m1) 5,120 5,120 5,120 5,120 5,120

Mass of compacted specimen(m2-m1) 4,360 4,520 4,638 4,610 4,560

Bulk Density = (m2-m1) x mould factor 1.896 1.966 2.017 2.005 1.983

Moisture content container No

Weight of wet soil + container m1 153.40 154.10 206.00 166.33 132.15 147.11 190.80 128.96 190.42 129.98


53/67



Weight of dry soil + container m2 143.81 142.24 187.23 150.97 119.96 133.11 169.90 117.00 169.90 117.00

Mass of container m3 30.39 30.99 31.42 30.71 30.74 30.71 30.56 29.00 30.56 29.00

Weight of water (m1-m2) 9.6 11.9 18.8 15.4 12.2 14.0 20.9 12.0 20.5 13.0

Weight of dry sample (m2-m3) 113.4 111.3 155.8 120.3 89.2 102.4 139.3 88.0 139.3 88.0

8.5 10.7 12.0 12.8 13.7 13.7 15.0 13.6 14.7 14.8

Moisture content w (m1-m2)/(m2-m3) x 100 9.6 12.4 13.7 14.3 14.7

Dry density = (100x bulk density)/(100+w) kg/m3 1,731 1,749 1,775 1,754 1,729


54/67



Table 15 Test results for Particle size analysis test (BS 1377: Part 2) for chainage 0+010


PROJECT: Kira-Kito Road

PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS (BS 1377:Part 2)

Sample reference :1 Sampling Date: 17

-04-

12

Location Kira Kito Testing Date: 25

-04-

12

Km 0+100 LHS

Sample Description Red Gravel Material

Initial wt before washing : Moisture Content :

Dry wt after washing : Initial Dry Weight 1300

Grading Modulus = 2.02

Diameter Partial Cumulative Cumulative % Passing Grading Limits

Retained Retained Retained

(mm) Mass(g) Mass (g) (%) (%) (%)

50.000 0.00 0.0 0.0 100.0

37.500 0.00 0.0 0.0 100.0

20.000 96.98 97.0 7.5 92.5

10.000 24.85 121.8 9.4 90.6

5.000 59.10 180.9 13.9 86.1

2.360 247.12 428.1 32.9 67.1

1.180 227.07 655.1 50.4 49.6

0.500 286.22 941.3 72.4 27.6

0.425 49.91 991.3 76.3 23.8

0.300 92.04 1083.3 83.3 16.7

0.150 104.59 1187.9 91.4 8.6

0.075 14.82 1202.7 92.5 7.5

Pan 2.49


55/67


56/67



Weight of wet soil + container m1 103.27 115.98 149.51 144.15 134.14 151.57 168.74 128.96 208.60 129.98

Weight of dry soil + container m2 97.02 108.45 138.21 133.46 123.08 138.42 153.22 117.00 186.14 117.00




9.4 9.7 10.6 10.4 11.9 12.2 12.7 13.6 14.4 14.8


Dry density =(100x bulk density)/(100+w) Kg/m3 1,521 1,620 1,700 1,647 1,606


57/67


58/67



Table 18 Test results for the Moisture-Density Relatios of the soil (BS 1377: Part 4) for chainage 0+300


Project Road: Kira-Kito Road

DATA SHEET FOR MOISTURE - DENSITY RELATIONS OF SOILS

USING 4.54KG. RAMMER ( OMC & MDDTEST )

As per BS 1377: Part4

Sample No: Sampling Date: 17 -04-12

Source/Location of Sample: Kira Kito Testing Date: 25 -04-12

Km 0+300 LHS

Sample Description : Red Gravel Material Technician:IgaDan

Proposed Use: Wearing Course

Mass of mould(g): 5,120

Volume(cm3): 2,299

Specimen Number/MouldNo. 1 2 3 4 5

Mass of mould+base+compacted specimen ( m2 ) 9,030 9,190 9,380 9,400 9,370

Mass of mould + base (m1) 5,120 5,120 5,120 5,120 5,120

Mass of compacted specimen(m2-m1) 3,910 4,070 4,260 4,280 4,250

Bulk Density = (m2-m1) x mould factor 1.701 1.770 1.853 1.862 1.849

Weight of wet soil +container m1 140.32

115.98

208.60

129.98 161.75 153.30

138.74

128.96 149.51

144.15

Weight of dry soil + containerm2 132.02

109.75

192.01

120.45 147.61 140.49

126.52

117.00 134.91

129.46




8.2 7.9 10.3 10.6 12.1 11.6 12.7 13.3 14.4 14.6


Dry density = (100x bulk density)/(100+w) kg/m3 1,574 1,602 1,656 1,647 1,614


59/67


60/67



Appendix IV: Design Charts


61/67




62/67




63/67




64/67




65/67




66/67



Appendix IV: Photographs of the project execution

Figure 20Assembling of the DCP test equipment

Figure 21 Applying blows to the soil to get penetrations

Figure 22 Recording of pentrations

Figure 23 Measuring of the distances from one chainageto another

Figure 24 The Kira-Kito road condition


67/67


Figure 25 Ruler used to measure the penetration Figure 26 Sampling to obtain samples for laboratorytests

final year project, iga dan

Documents