See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281174804

DESIGN OF CC PAVEMENT FOR RURAL ROADS USING STONE CHIP

AGGGREGATES AS A REPLACABLE MATERIAL

Conference Paper · April 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 4,298

2 authors:

Saiyed Farhana Dr. Jayeshkumar Pitroda

SSNNL Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College
11 PUBLICATIONS   12 CITATIONS    305 PUBLICATIONS   1,032 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Construction Management Approach View project

risk management in real estate View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dr. Jayeshkumar Pitroda on 23 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

DESIGN OF CC PAVEMENT FOR RURAL ROADS USING

STONE CHIP AGGGREGATES AS A REPLACABLE
MATERIAL
Saiyed Farhana1, Jayeshkumar Pitroda2

First Year Student, ME C E & M., BVM Engineering College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India 1

Assistant professor, Civil Engineering Dept., BVM Engineering College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India 2

Abstract: Improving the rural road network will improve the accessibility of district centers,
provincial centers and other important locations. Rural roads are important for rural
development. Improved access will improve living conditions and hence reduces poverty. The
paper aims to provide a solution to strive for sufficient budgetary support from government
agencies by providing cost-effective concrete for development of rural roads. This paper
provides utilization of stone chips in the concrete pavement by partial replacement and
analysis of the compressive and flexural strength and modulus of elasticity data to calculate
the thickness of concrete rural roads.

Keywords: Optimum Mix Design, Rigid Pavement, Stone Chips Aggregate

I. INTRODUCTION
It can be noted that one of the causes of rural poverty, is poor access. Rural area welfare and
access are closely related. Improved access will improve living conditions and hence reduces
poverty. On the other hand inaccessibility restricts movement of people, goods and services
and limits the development of markets and other service centers.

Rural development initiatives often demand improving access. Access can be improved in
two fundamental different ways: improving the mobility of the people or improving the
distribution of goods and services. One main strategy to improve access is to improve the
quality and the extent of the road network in an area. In general, roads facilitate development;
new roads will improve transport; improved transport will solve access problems; better
access improves living conditions and create alternative income earning opportunities.
Improved living conditions and alternative income earning opportunities, in turn, induce
development. Improving the rural road network will improve the accessibility of district

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 1
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

centers, provincial centers and other important locations. It is therefore likely to have a
positive effect on the accessibility of high schools, dispensaries, pharmacies and hospitals,
markets and shops, government services and employment centers. Rural roads are important
for rural development. Roads improve mobility and improved mobility facilitates access.

To make value added concrete for development of sustainable infrastructure because there is
a great need to study the technical details concerned with various industrial wastes in
concrete and to reduce environmental hazards at the same time. To provide best feasible
solution for utilization aspects of the stone chips aggregates in construction industries. To
reduce the cost of concrete for rural development in India.

So, the paper is mainly concerned with eco-efficient utilization of stone waste as stone chips
aggregates as a replacement of natural basaltic aggregates in concrete roads for a rigid rural
pavement. It is desirable to provide low initial cost, essential basic access to all rural and
urban communities. This should be achieved using affordable and sustainable methods (both
in provision and maintenance). There will be a greater chance of sustainability if local
resources (materials, labor and simple equipment), management, enterprises and communities
can be involved in an effective way.

II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The research work was carried out in the concrete laboratory, B.V.M. Engineering
college,V.V.Nagar.the objectives and need for the study were determined looking at the huge
amount of waste from the quarry industries. Mix design (shown in table-1and table-2 for
materials quantity) for the sample cubes and cylinders was done as per IS: 10262: 2009
(Recommended guidelines for concrete mix Design, BIS. New Delhi, India, 2009). About 54
cubes for compressive test, 54 beams for flexural test and 18 cylinders were casted and tested
at 7 days, 14 days and 28 days curing period shown in figure 1. The results were analysed and
it was concluded to that optimum percentage replacement of the stone chips was at 30%
shown in table-3. The results of the compressive test, flexural strength and the modulus of
elasticity were further taken for the design of the concrete rural pavements. The design of the
pavement was done to calculate the thickness of the pavement for 30 kN and 51kN wheel
load with 2%, 4% and 6% CBR values and the traffic volume assumed to be 500 CVPD as
per IRC: SP: 62: 2004 (Guidelines for design of CC roads for Rural Roads).

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 2
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

TABLE 1: MIX DESIGN BY WEIGHT AND VOLUME

Cement Fine Coarse Water

W/C Ratio kg/m3 Aggregate Aggregate (Liter/m3)
By Weight kg/m3 kg/m3
0.50 394.00 708.51 1206.43 197.00

By Volume 1 : 1.79 : 3.063

TABLE 2: MATERIALS (Kg) OF DIFFERENT CONCRETE MIX

Sr. Concrete Materials ( kg)

no. mix Cement Fine Coarse Grit Stone chips Stone
aggregate aggregate coarse chips
(sand) aggregate grit
1 A0 (0%) 394.00 708.51 723.85 482.57 0.00 0.00

2 A1 (10%) 394.00 708.51 651.47 434.31 72.39 48.26

3 A2 (20%) 394.00 708.51 579.08 386.06 144.77 96.51

4 A3 (30%) 394.00 708.51 506.70 337.80 217.16 144.77

5 A4 (40%) 394.00 708.51 434.31 289.54 289.54 193.03

6 A5 (50%) 394.00 708.51 361.93 241.29 361.93 241.29

Compressive Strength At 7, 14 & 28 Days

Test

Tests to be done on On Flexural At 7,14 &28 Days

Concrete Hardened Concrete Test

Modulus of Elasticity
At 28 Days
Test

Figure 1: Tests carried out on hardened concrete

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 3
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

TABLE 3: RESULTS OF TESTS ON CUBES AND CYLINDERS

Concrete Average Average Modulus Cost

Mix Compressive Flexural of of
(M-25 strength Strength Elasticity Concrete
2 2 2
Grade) (N/mm ) (N/mm ) (N/mm ) (Rs./ m3)

Days 7 14 28 7 14 28 28
A0 15.70 17.93 28.74 2.38 3.11 3.66 24958 3415.68
A1 21.48 22.37 29.93 3.05 3.52 3.84 29583 3361.39
A2 22.52 24.15 30.37 3.13 3.29 3.60 30083 3307.10
A3 24.30 25.63 33.63 3.50 3.62 4.10 34500 3252.81
A4 23.26 23.85 30.07 2.30 2.50 2.72 24500 3198.52
A5 22.52 23.26 29.04 2.09 2.17 2.66 23167 3144.23

The design of the pavement by the IRC SP: 62, 2004 is a trial and error method. Design of
one of the sample with 30% replacement i.e. A3 concrete mix, wheel load 30kN and 6% CBR
value is as follows.

III. DESIGN OF A CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR RURAL ROAD

Design of A Cement Concrete Pavement For Rural Road For CBR 6% And A3 Type of
Mix Design Of M25 Concrete – 30KN Wheel-Load
( IRC:SP:20-2002 / IRC:SP:62-2004 )

Traffic Volume (A) = UP TO 500 CVPD (Assume)

Concrete Grade (fc) = 25 N/mm2
Characteristic Compressive Cube Strength = 33.63 N/mm2at 28 Days Actual
Compressive Strength
Flexural Strength ( ff ) = 4.10 N/mm2 [41.0 kg/cm2]
90 days Flexural strength as per lab.test = 4.87 N/mm2 [48.7kg/cm2]
Soaked CBR Value (%) = 0.06 (6%)
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k) = 45 (N/mm2/mm)*10-3
Effective K Value (20% more) = 54 (N/mm2/mm)*10-3

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 4
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

Elastic modulus of Concrete (Ec) (As per Actual

= 28996 N/mm2
Calculation)
Poisson’s ratio (µ) = 0.15
Coefficient of thermal coefficient of concrete (α) = 0.00001/˚C
Design Wheel Load (P) = 30 KN
Tyre pressure (q) = 0.5 N/mm2 [5 kg/cm2]
Spacing of Contraction Joints (L) = 3.75m [3750 mm]
Width of Slab (W) = 3.75m [3750 mm]
Radius of load contact (assumed circular), (a) =13.82 cm

Trial Thickness for Slab, h = 150mm.

Check for Temperature Stresses:

Assuming a contraction joint spacing of 3.75 m and 3.75m width

Temperature Stress (σte):1.67

The temperature differential (∆t) for Gujarat for a slab thickness of 150mm is 12.5˚C.

The Radius of Relative Stiffness, l = √

Hence, l = 626.95 mm.

L/l = 3750 / 626.95= 6.0

W/l = 3750 / 626.95= 6.0

Both values are same, if not then adopt greater one.

Bradbury’s Coefficient, C = 0.942 (from figure 1, pg. 9)

[Value of C can be ascertained directly from Bradbury’s chart against values of L/l and W/l]

Temperature Stress in edge region, σte =

Hence, σte= 1.67 N/mm2.

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 5
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

Edge Load Stress (σle):3.39

From Page: 12, Edge Load Stress,

Radius of equivalent distribution of pressure (b),
b = a (if (a/h >= 1.724);
(b) =√ - 0.675 h if (a/h < 1.724),

For slab thickness of 150mm; Edge Load Stress, σle, is 3.39 N/mm2 (3.39MPa).

Total Stress = Edge Load Stress + Temperature Stress = 3.39 + 1.67 = 5.06 N/mm2, which is
more than the allowable flexural strength of 4.92 N/mm2.

Hence, assumed thickness of slab = 150mm, is NOT OK. [As per Temperature Stress
Criteria]

So assume trial thickness 160 mm

The Radius of Relative Stiffness, l = √

Hence, l = 658.04 mm.

L/l = 3750 /658.04= 5.7

W/l = 3750 /658.04= 5.7

Both values are same, if not then adopt greater one.

Bradbury’s Coefficient, C = 0.86 (from figure 1, pg. 9)

[Value of C can be ascertained directly from Bradbury’s chart against values of L/l and W/l]

Temperature Stress in edge region, σte =

σte = 1.57

From Page: 12, Edge Load Stress,

Radius of equivalent distribution of pressure (b),
b = a (if (a/h >= 1.724);
(b) =√ - 0.675 h if (a/h < 1.724),

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 6
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

For slab thickness of 150mm; Edge Load Stress, σle, is 3.04 N/mm2 (3.04 MPa).

Total Stress = Edge Load Stress + Temperature Stress = 3.04 + 1.57 = 4.61 N/mm2, which is
less than the allowable flexural strength of 4.92N/mm2.

Hence, assumed thickness of slab = 160mm, is OK. [As per Temperature Stress Criteria]

So assume trial thickness 160 mm

Check for Corner Stresses (σlc):

From Fig. 5 (Page 12), Corner Load Stress for wheel load of 30KN,
for k = 54.0 (N/mm2/mm)*10-3 = 0.054 N/mm2/mm = 0.054 N/mm2/mm (Approx.) and slab
thickness of 150mm is 3.08 N/mm2 (3.08MPa).

[Temperature Stress in the corner region is negligible, as the corners are relatively free to
warp, hence it can be ignored.]

Hence, σlc= 3.08 N/mm2, which is less than the allowable flexural strength of 4.92
N/mm2.

So, the slab thickness of 160 mm is Safe.

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In a way similar to the above design calculation as per IRC:SP:20-2002 / IRC:SP:62-2004
the results of thickness of the pavement for different mix designs A0, A1, A3, A4, A5 for
30kN and 51kN wheel load were obtained by trial and error. The results are as follows:
(shown in table-4 and table-5)

TABLE 4: M25 GRADE CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR RURAL ROAD

RESULTS (30KN)

Concrete 2% CBR 4% CBR 6% CBR

Mixes Slab Cost Slab Cost Slab Cost
Thickness (Rs./sq.m) Thickness (Rs./sq.m) Thickness (Rs./sq.m)
(mm) (mm) (mm)
A0 160 546.50 170 580.60 170 580.60

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 7
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

A1 160 539.82 160 539.82 160 539.82

A2 170 562.20 170 562.20 170 562.20
A3 150 487.92 160 520.44 160 520.44
A4 200 639.70 200 639.7 210 671.68
A5 200 628.84 200 628.84 210 660.28

TABLE 5: M25 GRADE CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR RURAL ROAD

RESULTS (51KN)

Concrete 2% CBR 4% CBR 6% CBR

Mixes Slab Cost Slab Cost Slab Cost
Thickness (Rs./sq.m) Thickness (Rs./sq.m) Thickness (Rs./sq.m)
(mm) (mm) (mm)
A0 210 717.29 210 717.29 210 717.29
A1 200 672.27 200 672.27 210 705.89
A2 210 694.49 220 727.56 220 727.56
A3 190 618.03 200 650.56 200 650.56
A4 240 767.64 250 799.63 250 799.63
A5 250 786.06 250 786.06 260 817.50

The graphical representation of the thickness of the slab and the concrete mix for both wheel
loads are as follows.

Figure 2: Thickness of Slab V/S Concrete Mix for Wheel Load 30kN and 51kN

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 8
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

As per figure-2, At 30 % replacement the thickness of pavement for CBR value 2%, 4%
and 6% are 150 mm,160 mm, and 160 mm for a wheel load of 30 kN .For wheel load of 51
kN the thickness of pavement for CBR 2% , 4% and 6% are 190 mm, 200 mm and 200 mm.
Hence A3 concrete can be considered as optimum mix having lowest thickness compared to
the other mixes.

The graphical representation of the cost (Rs/m2) of the slab and the concrete mix for both
wheel loads are as follows:

Figure 3: Cost per Square Meter V/S Concrete Mix for Wheel Load 30kN and 51kN

As per figure-3, For CBR values 2%, 4% and 6% the cost of concrete is 487.92 (Rs/m2),
520.44 (Rs/m2) and 520.44 (Rs/m2) for 30 kN wheel load, which is low compared to other
mix. For CBR values 2%, 4% and 6% the cost of concrete is 618.03 (Rs/m2), 650.56 (Rs/m2)
and 650.56 (Rs/m2) for 51 kN wheel load, which is low compared to other mix.

V. CONCLUSION
Based on limited experimental investigations concerning the compressive strength, flexural
strength and modulus of elasticity test of concrete (M25 Grade) for rigid pavement, the
following observations are made in the ray of the objectives of the study:

 For replacement of the basaltic aggregates at 30% i.e. A3 concrete mix, economic
concrete in terms of compressive strength, flexural strength as well as high modulus of
elasticity cost is produced.

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 9
International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

 Increase in compressive strength, flexural strength and Modulus of Elasticity of concrete

is up to 30 % replacement by stone chips.
 For this study it is concluded that the A3 concrete mix is economic and can be used for
rigid rural road pavements.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Authors thankfully acknowledge Dr. C. L. Patel, Chairman, Charutar Vidya Mandal,
Er.V.M.Patel, Hon. Jt. Secretary, Charutar Vidya Mandal, Dr. F.S.Umrigar, Principal, BVM
Engineering College, Dr. L. B. Zala, Professor and Head, Civil Engineering Department,
BVM Engineering College, Prof. J. J. Bhavsar, Associate Professor and P.G. Coordinator
(Construction Engineering and Management), B.V.M. Engineering College, Mr. Yatinbhai
Desai, Jay Maharaj construction, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India for their motivations,
infrastructural support and cooperation to carry out this research.

REFERENCES
[1] Darsh Belani, Prof. Jayeshkumar Pitroda (2013), “Value Addition to Fly Ash Utilization by Eco-Efficient
Development of Rigid Pavement in Rural Roads” International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research
and Studies, Technical Journals Online (IJAERS), E-ISSN 2249–8974, Volume-II, Issue-III, pp:75-78 ,
April-June, 2013.
[2] Darsh Belani, Prof. Jayeshkumar Pitroda (2013), “Fly Ash (F-Class): Opportunities for Sustainable
Development of Low Cost Rural Roads” International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology
(IJETT), ISSN: 2231-5381, Volume-4, Issue-5, pp:1614-1619, May 2013.
[3] IRC: SP: 20: 2002 (rural road manual)
[4] IRC: SP: 58: 2002 (guidelines for the design of plain jointed rigid pavements for highways)
[5] IRC: SP: 62: 2004 (guidelines for design of cc roads for rural roads)
[6] Jayeshkumar Pitroda, Dr. L. B. Zala, Dr. F. S. Umrigar (2013), “Hypo Sludge: Opportunities for
Sustainable Development of Low Cost Rural Roads” International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316 (Online) Volume 4, Issue 5, September
– October, pp. 130-142, peer reviewed journal, Journal Impact Factor (2013): 5.3277
[7] Jayeshkumar Pitroda, Dr. L. B. Zala, Dr. F. S. Umrigar (2013), “Utilization of Hypo Sludge by Eco-
Efficient Development of Rigid Pavement in Rural Roads” International Journal of Engineering Trends and
Technology (IJETT), ISSN: 2231-5381, Volume-4, Issue-9, Sep 2013/3994-4000
[8] L. R. Kadyali, N. B. Lal, “principles and practices of highway engineering”
[9] Mayur Shantilal Vekariya, Prof. Jayeshkumar Pitroda (2013), “Assessment of Basaltic Aggregate and Stone
Chips in Indian Context” International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), ISSN:
2231-5381, Volume-4, Issue-8, August 2013/3489-3495

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 10
 International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”
ISBN: 978-81-929339-1-7

[10] M. L. Gambhir, “concrete technology", McGraw-Hill, third addition

[11] M. S. Shetty, “concrete technology (theory and practice)", S. Chand & company
[12] Ministry of communications, transport, post and construction rural development committee project
lao/95/001 “irap”, issue paper 3 ,“rural road planning”, recommendations for improving the rural road
network in lao P.D.R
AUTHOR’S BIOGRAPHY

Saiyed Farhana M. was born in 1992 in Petlad town, Gujarat. She

is pursuing her Maters of Engineering degree in Construction
Engineering and Management from Birla Vishvakarma
Mahavidhyalaya Engineering college, Vallabh Vidyanagar,
Gujarat. She has published 2 international papers and a paper in
national conference.

Prof. Jayeshkumar R. Pitroda received his Bachelor of Engineering

degree in Civil Engineering from the Birla Vishvakarma
Mahavidyalaya, Sardar Patel University in 2000. In 2009 he
received his Master's Degree in Construction Engineering and
Management from Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya, Sardar Patel
University. He joined Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya
Engineering College as a faculty in 2009, where he is Assistant
Professor of Civil Engineering Department with a total experience
of 14 years in the field of Research, Designing and education. He is
guiding M.E. (Construction Engineering & Management) Thesis
work in the field of Civil/Construction Engineering. He has
published many papers in National Conferences and International
Journals.

11th April, 2015, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli 11

View publication stats