MODFICATION TO

PAVEMENT DESIGN
-CASE STUDY IN MATALE DISTRICT

PRESENTED BY H.D.H.R. HEMAPALA

RESIDENT ENGINEER
EGIS –CEA JV
MATALE
2.REASONS FOR PAVEMENT DESIGN
MODIFICATION
 Cracks appeared on the existing road pavements
 Cracks appeared in adjacent asphalt roads
 Cracks appeared in some houses
2.1 CRACKS IDENTIFIED BEFORE COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION WORK.

Road Name : Handungamuwa Kumbukoya Road Road Name : Handungamuwa Kumbukoya Road
Date : 2016/09/24 Date : 2016/09/24
Chainage : Ch.0+980 Chainage : Ch.0+980

OVER THE LIME STABILISED PRIMED SURFACE (Approx.- 150mm)

Road Name : Bobella Bibila Road (R-27) Road Name : Kapuwatta Akkara seeya
Yapagama road (R-20)

OVER THE EXISTING ROAD SURFACE

2.2 CRACKS IDENTIFIED AFTER CONSTRUCTION WORK.
(Cracks appeared after construction of pavement designed according to
conventional pavement designs)

Road Name : Bobella Bibila Road Road Name : Kanangamuwa Parawatta Road
Date : 2016/07/21 Date : 2016/09/06
Chainage : Ch.0+740-Ch.0+750 Chainage : Ch.1+897

OVER THE NEWELY LAID ASPHALT SURFACES

 2.3 INVESTIGATIONS DONE TO FIND CAUSES FOR CRACKING-

EXCAVATED TEST PITS, SAMPLE COLLETED AND TESTED.

Lime
stabilised
soil

Clayey
material Cracks
developed
from sub
grade

Road Name : Handungamuwa Kumbukoya Road Road Name : Kannangamuwa Parawatta Road
Chainage : Ch.0+980 Chainage : Ch.1+890
3.TESTING PROCEDURE USED

 Information collection from Public

 Excavated road and investigation done and results are as follows

 Atterberg limit (LL>50, PI>25) – clayey soil
 Sieve Analysis (percentage passing of the sieve 0.075mm
average-50 %) High content of fines.
 Linear shrinkage (shrinkage >8% is critical)
 CBR =12, (Design class S4 satisfied)
4.PRELIMINARY RESEARCH
4.1 Visit by a team from R&D Division, RDA and their recommendations
a) Option 1: Modify the pavement design with a layer of 100 mm single sized
aggregate overlay with ABC
b) Option 2: Construct aggregate base course (Minimum Thickness of 175 mm)
over the geotextile (F500M – 30KN/m) placed on existing road

4.2 Visit by Prof. U.de.S.Jayawadena (University of Peradeniya) and his

recommendation.
a) Seal the cracks and observe performance.
4.3 OBSERVION OF SUBGRADE BEHAVIOUR WITH THE MOISTURE
VARIATION

Water
ponding in
earth drain

Cracked
surface

- Cracks width was reducing with time and most of the cracks disappeared after water
ponding.
5. PROPOSED MITIGATION AND RECTIFICATION
METHODS.
5.1 INTRODUCE A GEOGRID AT THE MIDDLE OF AGGREGATE BASE
COURSE.(100kN/m)-minimum 300mm overlapping

Road Name : Bobella Bibila Road Name : Bobella Bibila

Date : 2016/07/21 Chainage : Ch.0+740-Ch.0+752
Chainage : Ch.0+740-Ch.0+752 Activity : Cross section
Activity : Placing Geogrid GX 100x100
5.2 CRUSHING AND COMPACTION OF EXISTING DAMAGED CONCRETE PAVEMENT

Road Name : Gedige Junction to Hapugasyaya TamilVillage via

Ududeniya Road
Chainage : Ch.2+980
5.3 PLACING GEOTEXTILE SEPARATOR ON EXISITING PAVEMENT.

Road Name : Handungamuwa Kumbukoya Road Name : Handungamuwa Kumbukoya

Date : 2016/12/08 Date : 2016/12/08
Chainage : Ch.0+950 Chainage : Ch.1+030
Activity : Placing Geotextile Separator F-500M Activity : Subgrade Preparation for Placing Geotextile Separator F-500M
5.4 RAISING EXISTING ROAD
 Conventional Pavement Design
 Modified Pavement Design

(Min 500 mm)

5.5 REPAIRING CRACKED ASPHALT PAVEMENT WITH 300MM OF ABC LAYER
WITH ASPHALT OVERLAY.

Road Name : Kanamulayaya – Rubber watta Road Road Name : Kanamulayaya – Rubber watta Road
Date : 2017/07/03 Chainage : Ch.1+610-Ch.1+625
Chainage : Ch.1+610-Ch.1+625 Activity : Repaired location Cross Section
Activity : Asphalt Cracked location
6.OBSERVATIONS
Flexible Road Pavement
 No cracks appeared after laying the Geogrid at the middle of layer of
ABC (minimum 300mm)
 Some cracks appeared after laying the Geotextile over the prepared sub
grade (but comparatively less with the section where geotextile was
not placed)
 Less cracks appeared over the pavement constructed on raised
embankment
 No cracks appeared in pavement section where ABC thickness was
300mm
Rigid Road Pavement
 No cracks appeared in the pavement constructed on rubblized concrete
pavement
7.RECOMMENDATIONS.

 HIGHLIGHTED FACTORS FOR SUB GRADE INVETIGATIONS

1. FOLLOWING PARAMETERS TO BE CHECKED.
 Fine Content & Atterberg Limits
 Expansion index of soil < 91 (Swelling percentage x Passing
percentage sieve-4.75mm)
 Weighted plastic index <1200 (PI x Passing percentage of the sieve
0.425mm)
 Linear Shrinkage <8
 Note-Above parameters have been proposed by Prof.
W.K.Mampearachchi
7.RECOMMENDATIONS Contd…

IF PROPERTIES ARE NOT SATISFIED, FOLLOWING REMIDIES

ARE PROPOSED.(by Prof. W. K. Mampearachchi)
 Soil stabilization Mechanical (Physical change in properties) and
Chemical (adding foreign material and will react physically to change
the properties)
 Applying Geogrid material with the combination of lime stabilization
 Vertical moisture barriers
 Excavate 300 mm wide, 2.4 m deep trench and put the Geosynthetic
composite + polythene and Gravel backfilling.
 Excavate 80 mm wide, 2.4 m deep trench and filled with high slump
concrete
8.CONCLUSION
 Cracks are mainly developed due to soil with high clay content. Wet sieving
is recommended for determination of LL & PI in addition to the sub grade
properties
 Better to introduce the Geogrid rather than Geotextile separator. But cost is
high
 Cracks can be minimised with increasing the aggregate base course
thickness
 Demolition and compaction of the existing concrete pavement will prevent
crack formation in pavement. Reuse of failed existing concrete pavement is
cost saving and environmentally friendly process.
 Cracks sealed with rubberised emulsion shows better performance than
CSS1/CRS1 sealing
THANK YOU