CIRCLY 7.0 Workshop - Australia - December 2022 - One Slide Per Page

CIRCLY Workshop
Rev. December 2022

Course Outline
Session 4 Session 1
Hands On and more Mechanistic Design
• Airport and • Review of
Heavy Duty Mechanistic
Applications Pavement
• Haul Roads Design Theory
• Workshop • Overview of
exercises capabilities
Session 3 Session 2
Hands On and more CIRCLY 7 Overview
• Powerful CIRCLY • User Interface

Features • Job assembly
• Advanced • modify
Austroads topics databases
• Workshop • Workshop
exercises exercises
Review of Pavement Design using
Mechanistic Analysis
Austroads calls Mechanistic - Empirical Procedure (MEP)

aaaa- previously General Mechanistic Procedure (GMP)
Oldest surviving paved road connected black basalt quarry 12 km to
quay & Nile - Egypt Old Kingdom 4th – 5th Dynasty (c. 2543 – 2306 BC)
2.1 m (4 cubits) wide roadway constructed from irregular pieces of
basalt & silicified (petrified) wood, & slabs of limestone & sandstone
Khufu
Pyramid
road
Traffic : blocks on sleds
Mortuary Temple basalt

floor in front Khufu ‘Great
kmt (kemet)
Pyramid’ Giza ∼ 2500 BC ‘black land’
AASHO Road Test (1956 – 1961)
Six by two-lane Test Loops Cost about USD$650M (2018)
18hr/day for a million load applications 468 Asphalt Sections

AASHO Road Test introduced
Empirical Load-Damage Relationship
‘The Fourth Power Law’

Note exponent of 4
Overall Pavement Damage (traffic loading)4
Overall Pavement Damage caused by a particular load

is approximately related to the load by a power of four
Damage
Load
Australian Standard Axle
Single Axle with Dual Tyres (SADT) with load of 80 kN (8.2 tonnes)
-165 0 165 1800 mm
80 kN
Wheel Loading = 20 kN (2.05 tonnes)
(Used to standardise various axle configurations & loads)

Equivalent Standard Axles (ESAs)
Using 4th power relationship: convert mix of vehicle axle loads to ESAs
ESAs are input to (Empirical) Design chart
Design chart for unbound granular pavements with

thin asphalt (<40 mm) or sprayed bituminous seals
Figure 8.4
AGPT02-17
Accelerated Loading Facility (ALF)
ALF full-scale pavement test system (ARRB):

Enables the assessment of road pavement
zperformance within a short time scale
ALF multiple-axle rolling wheel loading assembly applied over 12 m of pavement

Empirical Design:
Granular Pavements With Thin Bituminous Surfacing
Only applicable to pavements comprising:
 unbound layers of granular material
 surfaced with either:

a bituminous seal or
Asphalt < 40mm asphalt < 40 mm thick
Unbound Granular
Subgrade
Empirical Design:
Granular Pavements With Thin Bituminous Surfacing
Figure 8.4: Design chart for unbound granular pavements with
aaaaaaaaaathin asphalt (<40mm) or sprayed bituminous seals
0
M inim um thickness of base m aterial
100
CIRCLY CBR
solutions >30
200
20
Top Granular 300
15
Ev = 350 MPa
400 10
Thickness
of 7
500
G ranular
M aterial
(m m ) 600 5
• Unbound granular base
a& subbases courses: 4
acrushed rocks & 700
natural gravels
• Selected subgrades 800 3

• Lime-stabilised subgrades
t = [ 219 - 211(logC B R ) + 58(logC B R ) 2 ]log(D E S A/120)
900
2
Urban Major Highway
1000
10
5 10 6 10
7 8
10 Log scale
D esign Traffic (ES As)
Thickness Calculator on pavement-science.com.au (just search for ‘calculator’) (AGPT02-17)
Empirical Design Limitations
Cannot provide designs for pavement structures involving:

 Asphalt > 40 mm
 Cement and other Stabilized layers:
as limitation of empirical database (no data)
Motivation for Mechanistic Design

Thin Bituminous Surfacings with CIRCLY
Asphalt < 40mm
Warning
If sprayed seal or asphalt surface layer < 40 mm thick
 inadequate for the impact of traffic loads on thin surfacings
 cannot assess fatigue in mechanistic model
Refer:
Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2: Pavement Structural Design -
AGPT02-17:
Section 8.2.7: Design of Granular Pavements with Thin Bituminous Surfacings
Austroads Pavement Design (AGPT02-17)
Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2:

Pavement Structural Design
Austroads Publication No. AGPT02-17
(Edition 4.3 Published November 2019)
https://austroads.com.au/publications/pavement/agpt02
Design changes for Heavy-Duty Flexible Pavements:
Effect of Austroads AGPT02-17 Guide on Bound Materials
Cemented materials: Similar thickness

Lean-mix Concrete: Similar thickness
Asphalt: Reduced thickness for
Heavy-Duty* structures
Ref. Moffatt, M. (2017) Vehicle mass data for pavement design
and asset management - Weigh-ln-Motion Forum September 2017
1st Heavy Duty Asphalt example: *107 ESA
Austroads 2004-12 Design

10% Less Asphalt
320 mm
Asphalt
Austroads 2012 Austroads 2017

Design Design
CIRCLY 6.0 CIRCLY 7.0
Ref. Dr M. Moffatt (2017)
Thickness reduction at higher traffic loads
2nd Heavy Duty Asphalt example:
? mm
after webinar presented on 9 March 2018 by Dr. Michael Moffatt (ARRB)
Reduced asphalt thickness designed with CIRCLY 7.0 (Austroads 2017 Method) vs
CIRCLY 6.0 (Austroads 2004-12 Method) leads to lower material/construction costs
Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology Part 5:
Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design (AGPT05-19)
 Covers pavement investigation, testing and

evaluation; identifies causes and modes of
distress; and describes treatment options:
Design structural overlays and stabilisation
treatments: Foamed Bitumen, Lime etc
 Edition 4.1 (Nov 2019) aligns structural

design of rehabilitation treatments with
Part 2: Pavement Structural Design Guide
 Webinar: Guide to Pavement Technology Part 5:

Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design
WEB-AGPT05-19 - 22 Aug 2019: Presented by
Dr Geoff Jameson and Dr Michael Moffatt.
 http://podcasts.austroads.com.au/e/guide-to-
pavement-technology-part-5-pavement-
evaluation-and-treatment-design/
State Government Supplements to the Austroads Guide
• Australia is a large continent with a wide range of climates

• each State Road Authority has a Pavement Design Supplement
1based on the Austroads Guide AGPT02-17
• each tailored to local climates, materials, performance, loadings
aand specifications
• the SRAs also have additional State specific Technical Notes
State Government Supplements to the Austroads Guide
 Transport for NSW (TfNSW) formly RMS – August 2018

(Google search string: “Supplements to Austroads Guides”) Note also used by ACT (see TRIS 06)
 Queensland Pavement Design Supplement – June 2021

(Google: “Queensland Pavement design supplement”)
 Roads Corporation of Victoria (VicRoads ) Code of Practice No. RC500.22.
Dec. 2018. Code of Practice for Selection and design of pavements and surfacings
(Google: “RC 500.22”) Note also used by Transport Services Tasmania
 South Australia – Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
RD-PV-D1 Pavement Design (Austroads Supplement) - 19 Sept 2019
(Google: “DPTI Earthworks & Pavements”)
 Western Australia - Main Roads Western Australia

Engineering Road Note 9 - May 2018* (new version due)
(Google: “Engineering Road Note 9 May 2013”)
 Northern Territory Govt. – Performance & Design Standards for N.T. Govt. Roads -
April 2017 vs 2.0
 New Zealand - NZ Transport Agency

New Zealand guide to pavement structural design - V1.2 April 2018
(Google: “New Zealand guide to pavement structural design”)
Engineering Road Note 9 (2018)
Western Australian Supplement to Austroads Guide to Pavement
Technology Part 2: Pavement Structural Design – AGPT02 (2017)
WARRIP research collaboration with ARRB produced a summary of changes to

ERN9: Presented to West Australian Pavements Group meeting on 1 May 2019.
https://www.warrip.com.au/projects/ - scroll down to ERN9.
Engineering Road Note 9 (ERN9) (2018):

• takes precedence over AGPT02 (2017)
• address industry comments previously received on ERN9 (2013)
• intended as a stand-alone guide for empirical design and does not
repeat information already supplied in AGPT02 (2017)
• Section numbers align with the section numbers in AGPT02 (2017)
• contains additional clauses over and above AGPT02 (2017), which are identified
as e.g. “3.17 [MRWA] Pavement Joints
• sourcing axle group data from all WIM sites caused delay but preparing typical
urban and rural TLD data is completed and it is likely to be published soon
Roads Corporation of Victoria - VicRoads
Download – Google: RC 500.22

Department of Transport and Main Roads (Queensland)
Google: Queensland pavement design supplement
• Note spreadsheet can also be downloaded
• 102 pages
Google: Queensland pavement design supplement
(LAYERS7.cmdb) • CIRCLY 7.0 Database

TMR
Pavement Rehabilitation Manual
February 2020
Supplement to Part 5: Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design of the Austroads

Guide to Pavement Technology (AGPT05) and has precedence for departmental
projects and roads controlled by TMR
Combined with AGPT05 the TMR Pavement Design Supplement provides an

evaluation procedure of existing pavements and a range of appropriate design
methods for the effective rehabilitation treatments
‘pavement rehabilitation’ is ‘any activity that improves the functional or structural

condition of a pavement while using some or all of its existing structure’
The types of pavements covered include:

• granular pavements surfaced with bituminous chip seals or asphalt
• full-depth or deep-strength asphalt pavements
• pavements with modified or stabilised layers
Transport for NSW (TfNSW)
• Version3.0 – August 2018

• 43 pages
• Google: Supplements to Austroads Guides
Issued to clarify, add to, or modify the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology, Part 5:
Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design (AGPT05)
• TfNSW accepts the principles in AGPT05: Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design
with variations documented in this supplement under following categories:
• TfNSW enhanced practice: Transport practices which enhance the Austroads Guides
• TfNSW complementary material: Transport reference material that complements the
Austroads Guides - documents include Manuals, Technical Directions &/or other
reference material & are to be read in conjunction with the Austroads Guides
• TfNSW: Transport practices that depart from the Austroads Guides
South Australia: Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
Some points from the Guide and SRA Supplements:
Mechanistic-empirical modelling not validated for asphalt surface layers < 40 mm thick
Do not include thin interlayers & surfacing, such as sprayed seals, SAMIs and geosynthetics
as they make no structural contribution
Design layer thicknesses should be rounded up to the nearest 5 mm
Note construction specifications commonly include min & max layer thicknesses for
compaction according to material size - such limits need to be considered in selecting trial
pavement configurations
A construction tolerance is typically added to the design thickness of the critical pavement
layer that governs the overall allowable loading or total thickness (after modelling)
- 20 mm for unbound granular, modified granular and lightly bound pavements (Qld)
- 10 mm full depth asphalt; deep strength asphalt; flexible composite; asphalt over granular
aaaaaaand asphalt over cementitiously stabilised granular pavements (Qld)
- 15 mm typically added to the thickness of the foamed bitumen stabilised material (Qld)
- 15 mm to thickness of the intermediate asphalt layer, or for pavement compositions
aaaaaawithout an intermediate asphalt layer to the total asphalt thickness (Vic)
- 10 mm tolerance for granular base, asphalt, lean-mixed concrete, bound material and
aaaaaaconcrete base based on the use of automated level control (NSW)
- 10 mm additional where non-automated level control systems used for construction (NSW)
Knowledge required to use CIRCLY
Austroads
Guide
CIRCLY
State
Supplements
State
Technical
Notes
Council
& Shire Industry
Guides Groups,
etc
Pavement Design System
DESIGN
TRAFFIC
SUBGRADE
EVALUATION
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
1. FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
2. RIGID PAVEMENTS
3. OVERLAYS
PAVEMENT
MATERIALS
Austroads
Ref. AGPT02-17
Austroads Pavement – Figure
Design Manual, P. 2.1 2.1
Mechanistic-Empirical Design method: Austroads
The procedure consists of:

• evaluating input parameters (materials, traffic, environment etc.)
• selecting a trial pavement
• analysing the pavement under truck axle loads determining allowable traffic
• comparing this with the predicted design traffic over the design period
• finishing by accepting or rejecting the trial pavement
The appropriate design inputs are:
• desired project reliability (Chapter 2)
• construction & maintenance policy influences (Chapter 3)
• environment (Chapter 4)
• subgrade (Chapter 5)
• materials & performance criteria (Chapter 6)
• design traffic loading (Chapter 7)
Design of Flexible Pavements (Chapter 8)
Austroads AGPT02-17
Pavement Design Process
Model CIRCLY
Design Traffic*(TLD & NDT) Inputs
Critical Strains Calculated

Pavement Structure Performance Criteria Applied
CDF Calculated
Not suitable
*Traffic Load Distribution
Modify a& NDT (Volume of traffic)
Overview of Pavement Design Systems
Section 2.3 AGPT02-17
‘Care must be taken to ensure that the sophistication of the

analysis method is compatible with the quality of the input data’
‘If not, then so many assumptions must be made to fill the gaps that
the results of the analysis can be misleading, if not worthless’
Can conduct parametric analyses with CIRCLY to test the sensitivity

of any assumptions – use best/worse guesstimate, etc…
Mechanistic-Empirical Design Method: Austroads
Bound Materials
Design Traffic for fatigue damage of described by HVAG & TLD:

cumulative Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups & Traffic Load Distribution
Model candidate pavement with axle types/loads in TLD, &

Total damage = sum of damage calculated from strains* caused by
e..each axle in the TLD & want Cumulative Damage Factor CDF < 1
*horizontal strain bottom of layers: asphalt 1 & cemented materials 2
Design relates performance to strains
Unbound Granular Materials

not considered
Austroads AGPT02-17
Mechanistic-Empirical Design method: Austroads
Subgrade, Selected & Lime-Stabilised Subgrade
 Design Traffic for permanent deformation of subgrade,

selected subgrade & lime-stabilised subgrade in ESA
3 rutting & loss of surface shape - vertical strain at top of subgrade
Design relates performance to strains

not considered
Austroads AGPT02-17
How Traffic is characterized:
Austroads Vehicle Classes
X X Light Vehicles: Class 1 & 2 not used
Class 3 to 12 Heavy Vehicles*:

used for pavement Design Traffic
*TMR Qld Heavy Vehicles:

gross mass >= 4.5 tonnes
Austroads AGPT02-17 – Figure 7.1
Only a few Class 3 to 12
Heavy Vehicles used for
Pavement Design Traffic
Light Vehicles:
Class 1 & 2 not used
In Pavement Design
Australia
11 day/80 km traffic jam (worlds largest) Nat Hwy 110 Beijing China About 30% Heavy Vehicles
Millions returning Golden Week holiday- moved about of 1km/day
Austroads Axle Group Types
Axle group: ‘A set of closely spaced axles acting as a unit’
Adjacent axles considered part of same group if ≤ 2.1 m from each other
 Single Axle with Single Tyres (SAST)

 Single Axle with Dual Tyres (SADT)
 Tandem Axle with Single Tyres (TAST)
 Tandem Axle with Dual Tyres (TADT)
 TRiaxle with Dual Tyres (TRDT)
 Quad-Axle with Dual Tyres (QADT)
Single Tyre Dual Tyres
Austroads AGPT02-17
6 Axle Semitrailer
TRDT TADT SAST
Number of Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups HVAG = 3
This truck:
HVAG = 8
Austroads Vehicle Classification System
X X
Heavy 2 2 Class 2 to 7 HVAG

Vehicles (Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups)
2 3 NHVAG -
average number of HVAGs per
Heavy Vehicle for all HVs in
the traffic stream
3 3 = Total HVAG / Total HV
If traffic comprises only

these 10 Heavy Vehicles:
3 4
NHVAG = 34 / 10 = 3.4
5 7
> NHVAG = ‘heavier’ traffic
Austroads AGPT02-17 – Figure 2.1

Weigh-in-Motion (WIM)
 E.g. ARRB TR’s “CULWAY” system
Utilises sensors installed in an under-road culvert
Strain Signal ISWIM

International Society
for Weigh-In-Motion Strain gauges on roof
WIM network Queensland
PRIORITY WIM SITE ID: 159532
Capricorn Highway (Duaringa - Emerald)
‘159532’ TLD in different Databases
Austroads AGPT02-17
CIRCLY 7
TMR Class-Specific Traffic Load Distributions (CTLD) Spreadsheet*
*Can export TLD to CIRCLY if not already in Database

Distribution of Axle Group Loads:
Example Traffic Load Distribution: TLD App. G AGPT02-17
QADT
% Distribution %
Σ each axle group

aa= 100%
Σ Proportions
=1
Sample Traffic Load Distribution (TLD)
35
30
Alternative Axle Groups

25
% of Axle Group Type
SAST
20
SADT
TAST
15 TADT
TRDT
10
TRDT
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Axle Group Load (kN)
Austroads AGPT02-17
Table B5.4 & B5.5 - Traffic Load Distribution (TADT only)
‘Rural Arterial - Highways & Other Arterial Roads’ Vic.
0.04
NHVAG = 2.8 for both!

0.035 ESA/HV = 1.3 TADT Table B5.4
0.03 ESA/HV = 1.9

(heavier) TADT Table B5.5
0.025
Proportion
0.02
0.015
0.01
Heavier loads move right
0.005 > ESA/HV ratio: 1.3 to 1.9
more damage!
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Axle Group Load kN Vicroads 2018
Traffic Load Distribution (TLD)
TLDs for WIM sites across Australia & New Zealand on Austroads website
Recommended pavement designer use all available information (project-
specific, local, regional, etc.) before an appropriate TLD is selected from
Austroads list*
*State road agencies also provide presumptive distributions within their
jurisdictional supplements to Part 2 of the Austroads Guide
Decreasing accuracy
QLD TMR 2021
TMR Pavement Design Supplement
For Methods 2 and 3 – use appendix spread sheet:
Class-Specific Traffic Load Distributions
WIM site Data & Classification Count > .csv > CIRCLY 7
For Import to CIRCLY
Equivalent Standard Axles: ESAs*
 Full details in Section 7.6.2 - Austroads AGPT02-17
*ESAs used in evaluating Subgrade rutting and surface shape loss
 Uses empirical “4th Power Law” from AASHO Road Test

 Overall pavement damage (traffic loading)4
(damage related to 4th power)
Damage
16
80 kN Load = 1 unit of damage,
double to 2 units 160 kN Load
= 24 = 16 x units of damage Load
or 16 passes (94% reduction in service life) 2
Damage Bus vs Semitrailer
 Buses lighter than Class 9 semi but usually only 2 vs 6 axles:
Bus HVAG = 2 Semitrailer HVAG = 3
 2 Axle Bus (16.5t) = 4.4 ESA ESA/HVAG = 4.4/2 = 2.2

 6 Axle Semitrailer (42.5t) = 4.9 ESA ESA/HVAG = 4.9/3 = 1.63
 Bus higher damage ratio: 2.2 vs 1.63 so heavier in loading terms
(but not volume)
Buses in urban areas
provide a significant
loading contribution on
residential pavements:
generally > ESA/HVAG
= more damage
Note ESA/HVAG difference
Appendix E - Characteristics of Traffic at Selected WIM Sites
LHS RHS (next page)

Austroads AGPT02-17
Appendix E - Characteristics of Traffic at Selected WIM Sites
Circly calculates
automatically
> more damage:

greater by weight
(not volume)
Design number of ESA of traffic loading (DESA) = ESA/HVAG x NDT

Austroads AGPT02-17
Traffic Load Distributions (TLDs)
 > 200 TLDs defined in the Austroads AGPT02-17 Guide

 All pre-loaded into CIRCLY 7.0
 Aust. States specific TLDs also added to CIRCLY 7.0
 CIRCLY 7.0 can import user defined TLDs (see later) as
CIRCLY 7.0 is not a closed system
 TLDs give:
 - HVAG proportions
 - The proportion of various load levels for each HVAG type
- (SAST, etc)
CIRCLY: Traffic Load Distribution (TLD) Screen
Note ‘QLD’ in State combo box
ESA/HVAG ratio calculated automatically
Highlighted entry
used in analysis
Proportions shown
as check (read only)
“Design Traffic” - NDT
ESA/HVAG ratio calculated

automatically from the TLD
NDT - cumulative number of

Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups
(HVAG) over design period,
CIRCLY Navigator Panel for example, 5E7 (5 x 107)
(note can use scientific format)
How Traffic Load Distribution (TLD) is Modelled
CIRCLY 5.x / 6.0 CIRCLY 7.0

(Austroads 2004-2012) (Austroads 2017: AGPT02-17)
Traffic
Volume of traffic
Multipliers
DESA = ESA/HVAG x NDT = 0.7 x 107 ESAs
Design number of Equivalent Standard Axles
of traffic loading
Note DESA still used for subgrade permanent
surface deformation/rutting
Austroads 2017: AGPT02-17
Loads for Modelling
SAST SADT
Bound: Asphalt & Cemented Materials
6 axle group types modelled by 2 axles: SAST & SADT
Single tyre groups by SAST & Dual groups by SADT

Subgrade: 6 axle group modelled only by 1 axle: SADT
Austroads Assumed Elastic Properties
Material Type Elastic Model

Asphalt Isotropic
Cement Treated Isotropic
Unbound Granular Anisotropic
Subgrade Anisotropic
Austroads AGPT02-17
Assumed Anisotropic Elastic Properties
Anisotropic material is defined by 5 elastic constants:

Young’s moduli: Ev , Eh
Poisson’s ratios: νh , νvh
Shear modulus: f
Austroads AGPT02-17 Guide assumes following simplifications:

Eh = 0.5 x Ev Note: only require Ev and ν
ν = νh = νvh
f = Ev / (1 + ν )
Assumed Subgrade Elastic Properties
Vertical Modulus Ev:

Laboratory testing of conditioned specimens, or
Empirical relationship: Ev (MPa) = 10 × CBR (for CBR ≤ 15)
Maximum normally = 150 MPa
Poisson’s Ratio ν:
0.45 for cohesive materials, &
0.35 for non-cohesive materials
Austroads AGPT02-17
Anisotropic vs Isotropic Elastic Properties
 Anisotropy provides closer fit to observed surface deflection bowls:
ε
narrower, deeper & increase in compressive v at top of subgrade
Radius = 102.4 mm
Contact Stress = 0.80 MPa

Displacement (mm)
E = 500MPa: No Sublayers
Granular course behaviour
CIRCLY ‘General Analysis’

Alternative damage indicators
Subgrade
Asphalt
Base Course/
Subbase Course
Compressive vertical strain
at top of subgrade, Subgrade
selected subgrade &
lime-stabilised subgrade
material
Rutting
Rutting results from non-recoverable permanent deformation along channelised

longitudinal wheel paths with a terminal condition of about 20 mm average depth
Serviceability measure: water ponding & associated potential skid resistance loss
Alternative damage indicators
Bound
Asphalt
Tensile horizontal strain
Unbound
at base of asphalt granular material
Cemented granular
Tensile horizontal strain material
base of cemented material
Subgrade
Longitudinal crack
Allows moisture infiltration

Some possible causes: Surface layer fatigue or shrinkage
Reflective cracking
Top-down cracking
Fatigue Criteria: Asphalt
Allowable
Number of
repetitions
to failure ‘SF/RF’ adjusted
(fatigue life) “Shell equation”
where με = calculated maximum tensile strain in microstrain:
note microstrain (με) = 106 x unitless strain (ε)
E = asphalt flexural stiffness - Modulus (MPa)
Vb = volume of binder in asphalt mix (%)
Unitless horizontal strain

at underside of layer
CIRCLY version with the asphalt fatigue constant (k)

Austroads AGPT02-17
Shift Factor: accounts for difference between
in-service fatigue life & laboratory fatigue life
(presumptive value = 6) k depends on
stiffness, etc.
repetitions to failure ε unitless horizontal tensile

strain at underside of layer
Reliability Factor (see later)

Austroads AGPT02-17
Calculator for asphalt fatigue constant ‘k’
‘k’ is not calculated when VB = 0.0

(use for known ‘k’ values)
Inputs
Inputs ‘k’ is calculated when VB =/ 0
‘k’ Calculator also on Website

Fatigue Criteria: EME2 Asphalt
Pavement Design Supplement: Qld TMR - June 2021
Mix-specific fatigue relationship used: Equation 6.5.10 – EME2 general fatigue relationship*
Damage Exponent ‘b’ = 5.5
EME2 fatigue constant k = ( 57500/E0.36 ) / 106

as microstrain (με) = 106 x unitless strain (ε) - CIRCLY
where: N, SF, RF, E and 𝜇𝜀 defined as for Eq. 25: AGPT02-17

*P10: Cost Effective Design of Asphalt Pavements at Queensland Pavement Temperatures - Year 6 (2019/2020) NACOE
Set VB = 0.0 so ‘k’ not calculated

Set ‘b’ = 5.5
Input ‘k’
TMR CIRCLY 7.0 Materials Database (June 2021)

Asphalt: Fatigue Characterisation
Mix specific Fatigue Relationship
AGPT02-17 nominates lab flexural fatigue test for pavement design (Sect 6.5.11)
Asphalt specimen fatigue testing with four-point bending test to determine number
of cycles required for 50% modulus E reduction at diff. temperature & strain levels:
(Austroads Test Method AGPT/T274)
Equation 26: regression function
from asphalt mix fatigue results
ln (Nf50) = a + b ln(𝜇𝜀)
Nf50 = No. of cycles to 50%
modulus E reduction
a, b = constants determined from
the set of fatigue test results
𝜇𝜀 = strain (mm/m - microstrain)
New Project: APT6331 Asphalt

laboratory fatigue relationship
- finish 30-03-2023
Mix specific fatigue curve example
Austroads Asphalt Mix Flexural Fatigue Test
Regression Function Equation 26: CIRCLY
𝐥𝐧 (N ) 𝒂 𝑩 ∗ 𝐥𝐧 𝝁𝜺 Equation 26: regression function from asphalt

mix fatigue results: Sect.6.5.11 – AGPT02-17
𝒂, B = constants determined from a set

o fatigue test results
𝜇𝜀 = strain (microstrain)
𝑵 𝑲/𝝁𝜺 𝒃
𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒃 𝑩
𝑲 𝑬𝑿𝑷 𝒂/𝒃 b k
For CIRCLY:
𝑵 𝒌/𝜺 𝒃
𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒌 𝑲/𝟏𝟎𝟔
Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation:
can be modelled in CIRCLY*
Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation Design Example Resilient to flooding
(Appendix N - AGPT05-19)
*CIRCLY Exercise in Session 3
Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation Do’s and Don’ts - Damian Volker,

QTMR Pavement Rehabilitation Unit Northern Roads Symposium, Cairns June 2019
Fatigue Criteria: Cement-Treated
 The damage model is of the form:
k depends on modulus etc

Reliability Factor
F I k 12.0
N = RF
H K ε
repetitions to failure
ε horizontal tensile strain at
underside of layer
Austroads AGPT02-17
Fatigue Criteria:
Cement-Treated
• Generally bound materials have
binder content of > 3% by mass
M. Moffat
Some SRA’s divide into lightly bound and heavily bound materials
• Lightly bound have binder content of 3% to 4% UCS 1 to 2 MPa (28 day)
• Heavily bound have > 4% binder content (typically 6% max) UCS > 2 MPa
• All behave as an unbound material once cracked (see later)
• Cement modified (binder content 1% to 2%) treated as unbound granular:

iiimproves E but not fatigue properties UCS < 1 MPa (28 day)
(Austroads AGPT02-17, AGPT04D-19)
Table 6.9: Presumptive fatigue constants K (use with Equation 15: Note RF = 1)
Property Base quality Subbase quality Subbase quality
granular material crushed rock natural gravel
4-5% cement 3-4% cement 4-5% cement
Typical modulus E (MPa) 5000 4000 3000
Typical flexural strength (MPa) 1.4 1.2 1
In-service fatigue constant K 235 (0.000235)* 233 (0.000233)* 261 (0.000261)*
Table 6.19: Presumptive fatigue constants for lean-mix concrete (subbase)

aaaaaaaaaain-service fatigue relationship (Equation 27)
Property Lean rolled Lean screeded
concrete concrete
Typical modulus (MPa) 7000 10000
In-service fatigue
constant K 242 (0.000242)* 223 (0.000223)*
*CIRCLY format input
(Austroads AGPT02-17 )
(SRA example notes)
TMR QLD*: Table 6.4.8 – Presumptive fatigue constant K for standard heavily
bound (cemented) materials - Pavement Design Supplement - June 2021
Property Category 1 Category 2
Material Material
Presumptive design modulus (MPa) 4,000 3,000
Presumptive flexural strength (MPa) 1.2 1
Presumptive In-service fatigue constant K 233 (0.000233)* 261 (0.000261)*
Presumptive fatigue constant K for use with Equation 10 (AGPT02-17)
(instead of Equation 15 and reliability factors in Table 6.8 of AGPT02-17)
*see later: LBC Bonus Exercise from Pavement Design Supplement – TMR QLD June 2021
TfNSW: K = 263 (0.000263)* for heavily bound stabilised materials in Equation 10

aaaaaaawith max presumptive pre-cracking E = 5000 MPa - Deep lift insitu www
www stabilised courses > 300 mm spec. R75 with reduced E in lower 1/3rd of
wwwww layer with E = 3200 MPa & K = 312 (0.000312)* & fatigue details - see TfNSW
VICROADS: Determination of in-service fatigue characteristics using presumptive
aaaaaaaaaa values is not permitted. *CIRCLY
Austroads AP-R640-20 (Nov 2020)
Designing high performing flexible pavements
containing Lightly Bound Cemented materials
Improve procedures for structural design of pavements of

containing Lightly Bound Cemented (LBC) materials
LBC bases generally surfaced with sprayed seal or thin asphalt designed &
constructed to inhibit block cracking development & crocodile fatigue cracking that
can occur with Heavily Bound Cemented (HBC) bases
Qld pavements investigated with LBC bases & construction & performance
monitoring of 2 trial sections where in situ LBC E estimated & Lab testing to improve
understanding of cracking characteristics of LBC materials c.f. HBC materials -
UCS requirements proposed for LBC materials
Structural design method developed for moderate-to-heavily trafficked pavements
containing LBC & HBC materials in the post-cracking phase of life
• Design E varied according to the design E of layer supporting the cracked material
& thickness & E of overlying bound materials
• Design charts to select LBC base thicknesses to inhibit development of block &
crocodile cracking with the min thickness varying with design traffic loading &
support provided by the layer under the LBC base.
LBC & HBC layers are not sublayered in the post-fatigue cracking phase of life
Limiting Subgrade Strain Criterion
 The damage model is:
F 0.00915 IK 7
N =
H ε
repetitions to ‘failure’
(unacceptable level of pavement surface
ε vertical strain at top
deformation: rutting requiring rehabilitation) of subgrade (unitless)
Austroads AGPT02-17
Calibration
Link between Empirical and Mechanistic Model
CIRCLY
Feedback Loop CIRCLY

Figure 8.4: Design chart for granular
pavements with thin bituminous surfacing
Subgrade Damage
Connection with real world
Project Reliability - Definition
The Project Reliability is the probability that the pavement,

when constructed to the chosen design, will outlast its
Design Traffic before major rehabilitation is required
Section 2.3.1 Austroads AGPT02-17

Project Reliability – Distribution illustration
Project Reliability = 90%
0.08
20 Years
0.07
0.06
10% chance of < 20 years 90% chance of > 20 years

0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Design Life (Years)

Project Reliability
Table 2.1: Typical project reliability levels
Road Class Project Reliability (%)

Only 6 discrete levels minimum risk
Freeway 95–97.5
Highway: lane AADT>2000 90–97.5
Highway: lane AADT<2000 85–95
Main Road: lane AADT>500 85–95
Other Roads: lane AADT<500 80–90
Also a 50% Reliability maximum risk
Annual Average Daily Traffic (typical 24 hr traffic count)
Austroads AGPT02-17
Project Reliability Levels
Pavement Design Supplement TMR Qld June 2021
Transport for NSW (TfNSW) August 2018
VicRoads (Roads Corporation of Victoria)

Code of Practice No. RC500.22. Dec 2018
Design Period and Project Reliability
Factors by state for similar road types
Table2.5: Comparison of design periods and reliability levels by state
Selected Review of Pavement Thickness Design Procedures used by Main Roads WA

PRP16013 - August 2018
Reliability Asphalt
Suggested Reliability Factors (RF)
RF =
RF built into CIRCLY Austroads AGPT02-17

Reliability Cemented Materials
12.0
k 
N = RF 
ε 
Suggested Reliability Factors (RF)
RF =
RF built into CIRCLY Austroads AGPT02-17

Asphalt behaves as a viscoelastic material: Elastic modulus E (stiffness)
dependent on both the loading rate and material temperature
slower
softer hotter
Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (°C)
Figure 12.3: Presumptive asphalt moduli of dense graded mixes with Class 320
binder for various heavy vehicle design speeds (km/h) AGPT02-17 (ARRB 2020)
Asphalt Properties Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (24⁰)
Account for temperature: softer > temp
VicRoads
Response depends on
speed of load application
softer
Modulus
 Asphalt (6.5.3*) & Cemented (6.4.1*): Flexural Modulus

 direct from four-point bending tests:
Asphalt: AGPT-T274-16
Cemented Materials: AGPT-T600-18
 or estimation/interpolation approaches
 Granular (6.2.3*): Resilient Modulus (Vertical)

 direct from repeated triaxial tests or simplified
test procedure: AGPT-T053-07
 or assign presumptive values
* Austroads AGPT02-17
Austroads Test Methods and Specifications
Publication no: ATM-000-22
Pavement, Materials, Asset Management,Test Methods & Specifications
Provides hyperlinked list of Austroads Test Methods & Specifications

FLEXURAL MODULUS RELATIONSHIP FOR PAVEMENT DESIGN:
Modulus Master Curves - Austroads Test Method AGPT/T274
Calculate flexural E at any combination of temperature & loading speed
Flexural temp/freq
curve sweep data &bending
mastertests
curve (AGPT/T274)
Sigmoidal model applied in definition of the E Master from four point
Modulus Master curves (Eq. 19 AGPT02-17)

𝛼
log | E*design | = 𝛿 +
1 + 𝛽+ 𝛾log10 fr
E*design = Dynamic E for pavement design MPa
Modulus
𝛿,𝛼,𝛽,𝛾 = model fitting parameters
Reduced frequency (Hz) (Eq. 20)
𝑓𝑟 = 𝑎𝑇 x 𝑓 (Hz)
𝑎𝑇 = Shift factor as function of temp. °C Example temperature shift factor
𝑓 = Test frequency (Hz)

Temperature shift function (Eq. 21)
log10 (𝑎𝑇) = 𝑎 (T – Tref )2 + b (T – Tref )2
𝑎, b = model fitting parameters
T = temperature (°C)
T ref = reference temperature
Pavers
G. White
Austroads AGPT02-17:
For the purpose of the base design thickness, wearing surface layers
of asphalt or concrete segmental pavers are deemed not to contribute
to the strength of the pavement
Airports - FAA: (stronger pavers)

Structural design: treat 80 mm thick concrete block pavers & 20 mm
thick bedding sand (& possible geotextile) as a single 100 mm thick
layer of P- 401 asphalt (E = 1380 MPa)
Each paver E > than asphalt but articulated nature of the jointed block
surface reduces the effective E to a level similar to an asphalt surface
- “spacer concept without a fatigue criteria”
Geosynthetics: AGPT02-17- geogrid
reinforced subbase not included
 Austroads member agencies not able to provide additional guidance for
considering geogrids in pavement design
 Research work being conducted under Queensland TMR & ARRB NACoE (National
Asset Centre of Excellence) research program (P49: Quantifying the Benefits of
Geosynthetics for the Mechanical Stabilisation of Subgrade Soils) may lead to
improved means of incorporating geogrids into pavement structural design
 Manual: Section 4.4.7 'Geogrids in asphalt’

TMR Pavement Rehabilitation
 Pavement Design - Guide to Pavement Technology Parts 2 and 4C | March 2018 Webinar Q&As
Light Weight Deflectometer (LWD)
research and Geogrid at NACoE
New Zealand
Basecourse and Subbase Granular Strain Criterion:
The quality & rutting resistance of unbound/modified granular

basecourse & subbase layers derived from RLT (Repeat Load
Triaxial) tests
Derived Vertical Strain Criterion: N = (k / εv)b
k and exponent b determined from RLT test
εv vertical strain located 80 mm depth or on top of subbase
 NZ Transport Agency (2018): NZ guide to pavement structural

design, V 1.1
 NZ Transport Agency (2018): NZ guide to pavement evaluation and

treatment design, V 1.2
New Zealand
Alternative
damage indicators
εv 80 mm below surface
(no surfacing) εv Base unbound
granular material
RLT derived
εv maximum strain top of Vertical Strain Criterion
subbase granular material εv N = (k/εv)^b
Subbase unbound (k & b from RLT tests)
granular material
εv at top of subgrade
εv AGPT02-17 Austroads
Strain Criterion
Subgrade
N = (9150/εv)^7
Damage Factor
 The Cumulative Damage Factor is defined as

n
CDF =
N
 n is the number of repetitions of the load, and
 N is the ‘allowable’ repetitions of the response parameter
aaathat would cause failure
CDF = 0.05 (5% fatigue life if n = 5,000 and N = 100,000)

n
N
Cumulative Damage Factor
 If CDF = 1.0 (allowable = actual)
the system has reached its design life
If CDF < 1.0
system has excess capacity and the CDF represents

proportion of life consumed (if CDF = 0.5 = ½ life)
If CDF > 1.0
system ‘fails’ before all design traffic has been applied
If 20 Year Design life with annual growth rate of zero &

CDF = 1.5 (150% life consumed) = 20/1.5 = 13.3 year life
Total Damage Factor
(for a mix of load cases)
 The Total Damage Factor is defined by:
LoadCases
CDFTotal =  CDF
i =1
i
 i is summed over mix of loads,

e.g. different axle group types and loads
damage factor
calculated for
every cell
TLD versus CDF
CDF calculated from TLD
i.e. 10kn Load for SAST axle group of 0.001102 gives a CDF of 1.72E-07
TLD CDF
Sect. 8.2.4 AGPT02-17

Procedure for Determining Critical
Strains for Asphalt, Cemented
Material and Lean-mix Concrete
CDF total = Sum of all Axle Groups cells CDF for TAST axle group
Relationship b/n asphalt thickness & CDF at the base of an asphalt layer
generally 2 thicknesses
with same CDF (strain)
Caution value < 40 mm:
Horizontal Strain Compression to
Sect. 8.2 Mechanistic -
Tension at base of asphalt layer
Empirical Procedure &
App. K (AGPT02-17)
Design t = 76 mm
40 mm
440
Tension
Compression
Mechanistic - Empirical Design Method
Mechanistic: DesignTraffic Empirical:

Structural Model Performance
Relationships
TLD & NDT (cumulative Heavy

Vehicle Axle Groups design period)
n Cumulative Damage Factor
8.2 t
Design Traffic:
n repetitions
Standard Axle
Asphalt
critical strain ε
Base Course/ Layered
Subbase Course
System
Subgrade
Allowable
repetitions to failure
Performance N= C F kI b
Relationship: H εK
Damage Factor =
n
N
Design Traffic:
repetitions n
SAST (53 kN) Mechanistic Design – Bound:
SADT (80 kN)
Asphalt & Cemented materials
Asphalt Note values calculated for each particular
individual load and axle group
ε
Cement Stabilised
Subbase Course
critical strain
Performance Constant k
Subgrade
Reliability, SF
Damage Exponent b
= 5 for Asphalt
b
Performance
Relationship: N= C Fε I
k = 12 for Cemented
H K Design Traffic
Allowable Traffic
repetitions to failure CDF =
n
N
Cumulative Damage Factor (want < 1)
80 kN
Design Traffic:
repetitions n
Mechanistic Design - Subgrade

Standard Axle
SADT
Asphalt Layered
Base Course/ System
Subbase Course Performance Constant
critical strain ε* k = 0.00915 for Subgrade
Subgrade
*unitless strain
Damage Exponent
Performance
N= F kI b b = 7 for Subgrade
Relationship
HεK Design Traffic
Allowable Traffic
repetitions to failure (ESAs) CDF =
n
Cumulative Damage Factor (want < 1)
N
Thickness Design Iteration
 Increase/Decrease pavement thickness until

Max. (of all materials*) CDF = 1.0
Every damage indicator is used to find Max. CDF:
Asphalt tensile strain(s)
Cemented Granular tensile strain
Subgrade compressive strain
Note no CDF Granular Material
 Life is determined by weakest link (highest CDF)

*note no CDF for unbound materials
Pavement Design Process
Model CIRCLY
Design Traffic (TLD & NDT) Inputs
Critical Strains Calculated

Pavement Structure Performance Criteria Applied
CDF Calculated
Not suitable
Modify
Variation in foundation support
Impact on design requiring multiple
analyses for lower subbase thickness
0
100
140 Start End Base Upper Lower Design
chainage chainage thickness subbase subbase subgrade
Soaked CBR (%) (m) (m) (mm) thickness thickness strength
(mm) (mm) (% CBR)
575 1465 220 150 - 10
1465 1608 220 150 - 10
CBR 5% 1608 1692 220 150 140 5
1692 1855 220 150 - 10
Project Chainage (m)
1855 1995 220 150 140 5

1995 2307 220 150 - 10
2307 2905 220 150 - 10
2905 3005 220 150 - 10
3005 4155 220 150 - 10
4155 4405 220 150 140 5
4405 4580 220 150 - 10
4580 4680 220 150 140 5
4680 4880 220 150 - 10
4880 4955 220 150 100 7
4955 4975 220 150 - 10
4975 5155 220 150 - 10
NACoE P15: Qld Trial of High Standard Granular Base TrackStar Alliance Project Years (Year 4 - 2016/17) 09/02/2018
 Granular materials are not linear elastic (ε stiffening)
 Moduli are dependent on:

 Stress level (highest at pavement surface and decreases with depth)
 Stiffness of adjacent layers
Vertical Stress vs Depth
Contact Stress = 0.80 MPa 47.5 mm Depth
475 4% CIRCLY ‘General Analysis’
Vertical Stress (% of applied) MPa

Carpet Plot of Vertical Stress at 47.5 mm depth

- How stress dissipates from CLon this horizon
Contact Stress = 0.80 MPa

X=Y=0
Vertical Stress Szz (MPa)
47.5 mm
Y
X
X=Y=0
3D Plots created in CIRCLY ‘General Analysis’

Unbound Granular Materials:
Austroads Sub-layer generation
 Austroads method: Example L.1 from 2017 Design Guide:

Sprayed seal surfaced unbound granular pavement 475 mm thick
Thickness Modulus, Ev Poisson's

(mm) (MPa) Ratio
Unbound Granular Course 500 (top)

(High standard crushed rock) 475 0.35
Sublayers ?
Subgrade Infinite 50 0.45
CBR = 5
(? – variable as sub-layers)
Austroads Sub-layering*, or no Sub-layers
Granular materials placed on subgrade, selected subgrade material or
in situ lime-stabilised subgrade, sub-layering as follows:
 Divide total thickness unbound granular materials into 5 equal sub-layers:
CIRCLY sublayers automatically
 Top sublayer EV is minimum of presumptive value in Table 6.4 or Table 6.5

or determined using following Equation 41:
EV top granular sublayer = EV underlying material × 2(total granular thickness /125)
Granular materials sub-layered with E ratio between successive sub-layers:
1
 E top granular sublayer  5
R =  
 E subgrade  Section 8.2.3 AGPT02-17
Example if top granular sublayer EV = 500 MPa
1
 E top granular sublayer 5
95 mm R = 
E
 R = (500/50)1/5 = 1.585 EV 500
 subgrade 
95 mm 315 (500/1.585)
95 mm 199 (315/1.585)
95 mm 126 (199/1.585)
79 (126/1.585) Unbound Granular

95 mm Course of 475 mm
50 (CBR5%) Subgrade
*Note 50 < 500 MPa Ev granular top layer so granular is sublayered
0 100 200 300 400 500
EV Vertical Modulus (MPa)

*CIRCLY does sublayers automatically Austroads AGPT02-17
Austroads Sub-layering*, or no Sub-layers
Exception:
Granular layer is not sublayered & assigned single modulus
for the entire thickness, if:
 its modulus is < the modulus of the underlying subgrade,

selected subgrade material or stabilised subgrade, OR
 if placed directly on a bound cemented material or

lean-mix concrete subbase
Table 6.3 Presumptive values for elastic characterisation of unbound granular
materials under thin bituminous surfacings (spray seal or asphalt < 40 mm)
Note CIRCLY does not implement Table 6.3 Austroads AGPT02-17

Table 6.4 Suggested Vertical Modulus of Top Sublayer of Normal Standard Base Material
Higher Ev shields granular layer via less load transfer.
Select input
thicker reduces applied loading
1. Cover material is either asphalt or cemented material or a combination of these materials

Example using Table 6.4:
Appendix J: Procedures for Evaluation of Pavement Damage
Due to Specialised Vehicles
Ev top granular sublayer with Table 6.4 for 80 mm of Asphalt E = 3000 MPa
Interpolate: 80 mm = 1/5 (75 mm to 100 mm) x 50 (340 MPa to 290 MPa) = 10 MPa
so 340 MPa – 10 MPa = 330 MPa
80 mm 330 MPa
Austroads AGPT02-17
Table 6.5 Suggested Ev (MPa) of Top Sublayer of High Standard Base Material
Higher Ev shields granular layer via less load transfer.
Select input
thicker reduces applied loading
1. Cover material is either asphalt or cemented material or a combination of these materials

High Standard Base crushed rocks: Table 6.5
 made from sound / durable igneous and metamorphic rock
 high durability, strength and shear strength and specified in a way that
includes clay type and quantity, permeability, modulus and performance
under repeated loading with the in-service moisture content
 manufactured to tight tolerances with respect to durability, hardness,
grading, Atterberg limits etc.
 placed to very high standards with respect to density, degree of saturation,
level, thickness, shape, rideability etc. i.e. insitu density a minimum of 100%
characteristic (modified compaction).
 *very high level of quality control using on-site testing facilities and quality
assurance based on lot testing of stockpiled materials.
 part of overall design that addresses essential issues:
 protection from infiltration of water from all sources (side, below & surface),
 the construction platform, and
 the surface course
Austroads AGPT02-17, Section 6.2.3 Determination of Modulus of Unbound Granular Materials
EV Top granular sublayer - Table 6.5 / EV subgrade = 500/50 = 10
t = 475
EV= minimum of 500 < 696 App L.1 Sprayed Seal…
Use EV = 500 MPa in pavement
*EV top granular sublayer = EV underlying material× 2(total granular thickness: 475 / 125) = 696 MPa
Ev top granular sublayer / (EV subgrade) = 696 / 50 = 13.92*
EV top granular sublayer cannot be in this zone
*Note automatically calculated in CIRCLY: Eq. 41 Section 8.2.3 AGPT02-17

Selected Material Subgrade (fill)
& Stabilised Subgrade*
 Usual subgrade performance criterion used c.f. 125 mm for Unbound
Granular Base/Subbase
 Top sublayer of selected subgrade modulus = minimum of:
 EV top sublayer= EV underlying material × 2(thickness each selected or stabilised subgrade/150)
(Eq. 39 - Section 8.2.2 - support provided by underlying material)
 EV top of base = 10 x Design CBR of Selected Fill

 150 MPa (CBR15%)
 Note if multiple selected subgrade materials used- each selected subgrade/ lime-
stabilised subgrade material layer is sublayered (5 layers) instead of using
combined thickness (i.e. thickness Eq. 39 is not total of all selected materials)
Austroads AGPT02-17
 Note automatically calculated in CIRCLY
 *Note Qld TMR approach: Pavement Design Supplement - June 2021; Guideline: Structural
Design Procedure for Lime Stabilised Subgrade - June 2021 & Pavement Rehabilitation
Manual, Feb. 2020 (see later)
QLD TMR Guideline:
Structural Design Procedure for Lime Stabilised Subgrade -
June 2021
6.3 Structural Design Parameters

Lime stabilised subgrade behaves similar to lightly bound subbase or improved layer with a
target strength range UCS of 1.0 – 2.0 MPa
For a lightly bound subbase or improved layer manufactured with a lower quality granular
host material, design Ev of 210 MPa applies, regardless of the thickness and modulus of the
overlaying bound materials and the underlying support conditions
Table 6.3 – Design Parameters of Lime Stabilised Subgrade
Design Modulus Poisson's Ratio Degree of Sublayering
anisotropy
210 MPa 0.45 2 NOT sublayered*
Note: * single design Ev for the full depth of the lime stabilised subgrade
Pavement thickness design - permanent deformation assessed via vertical compressive

strain at the top of the underlying untreated subgrade, not the top of the lime stabilised layer
Table 8.2.2 – Minimum thickness of granular material over lime-stabilised subgrade
Design Traffic in Year of Opening Minimum Granular Thickness over Lime
(ESA/day) Stabilised Subgrade (mm)
< 100 150
100-1000 200
> 1000 250
Unbound Granular Materials &
Selected Material Subgrade (fill)
& Lime Stabilised Subgrade*
Eq. 39 Sect. 8.2.2: Selected Material & Lime-stabilised Subgrades
EV top sublayer = EV underlying mat.× 2(thickness each select. or stab. layer /150)
EV top sublayer cannot be in these zones
Eq. 41 Sect. 8.2.3: Unbound Granular Materials

EV top sublayer = EV underlying material × 2(total granular thickness /125)
*Note automatically calculated in CIRCLY AGPT02-17

CIRCLY 7.0 Overview
• Introduction to User Interface

• Job assembly from existing components
• How to modify databases
Using CIRCLY:
 CIRCLY automates many Austroads AGPT02-17 requirements

to reduce analysis setup time and input errors
 CIRCLY does not automatically satisfy all requirements and
recommendations of Austroads AGPT02-17
e.g. unbound granular layers* not automatically combined as may conflict
with some SRA's where different rules can apply in specific cases
*AGPT02-17 Sect 8.2.3 Part 2a: 'Divide the total thickness of
unbound granular materials into five equi-thick sublayers’
(see exercise: Modified Granular Base Design Example)
 Your responsibility is to select input parameters and use

CIRCLY in accordance with the recommendations contained in
Austroads AGPT02-17 and the relevant State Supplements
CIRCLY 7.0 Austroads AGPT02-17
 The exercises use CIRCLY’s automated functions & other

features that reduce input errors & analysis setup time
 These include:
 Automatic thickness determination: determine optimum thickness of a given layer
 Cost Analysis feature for layer thickness fine tuning to minimize costs
 Assessment of pavements via CDF
 Pavement & loading databases eliminate need to constantly re-key information
 Easy pavement layer modification
 Easy thickness alteration
 Asphalt k calculation
 Top sublayer Ev calculation for granular & selected (fill) & stabilised subgrades
 Automatic sublayer generation: granular & selected (fill) & stabilised subgrades
 Graphing options of various analysis results
CIRCLY 7 Worked Examples
Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2: Pavement Structural Design

Appendix L: Examples of Use of the Mechanistic-Empirical Procedure for Flexible Pavements

L.1 Sprayed Seal Surfaced Unbound Granular Pavement
L.2 Full Depth Asphalt Pavement
L.3 Asphalt Pavement Containing Cemented Material Subbase: Pre- & Post-cracking phases
Appendix J: Procedures for Evaluation of Pavement Damage Due to Specialised Vehicles
Example vehicle: a six-axle mobile crane
Guide to Pavement Technology Part 5: Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design

Appendix J: Asphalt Inlay Design Example
Appendix K: Cement-stabilised Base Design Example
Appendix L: Example of Granular Overlay Thickness Design Considering Lime Stabilisation of Subgrade
Appendix M: Modified Granular Base Design Example
Appendix N: Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation Design Example
CIRCLY 7 Worked Examples
Note specific details may change as advice is updated
Workshop examples illustrate the use of CIRCLY and should only be

used as a guide
There is ongoing revision of advice from the various authorities as

new research results become available
Road authorities may also vary their advice according to local

circumstances and policies
The example parameters provided may consequently need to be

revised depending on new and updated Austroads reports, your local
State Supplement and State-based reports and technical notes
CIRCLY 7.0 Overview
CIRCLY DEMO: Full depth asphalt pavement design
Click link below to view the Video Demonstration
https://pavement-science.com.au/softover/circly/circly5demos-2
View Captions/Subtitles in these languages: English, Spanish Español,
Chinese Simplified 简体中文, Hindi ह द , , French Français, Arabic .‫ﻋﺭﺑﻲ‬
Click the CC button to choose your language:
CIRCLY Units
Quantity
Length, Displacement mm
Modulus, Pressure MPa
Strain m/m
Force kN
Global Coordinate System
Travel
Direction
Centreline of Vehicle
CDF
Y
X
X
Wheels
on axle
Z
Z axis is vertically downwards

with Z = 0 on the pavement surface
(+ve down)
CIRCLY: Alternative graphics options
Damage (CDF) plot
Austroads Pavement Design (2017) - Cost optimisation

General Design - CDF’s
General Analysis - Displacements, stresses & strains at
selected depths and spatial locations
Haul Road Design - CDF’s
Plot of surface displacements:
Standard Axle with

Dual Tyres SADT(80)
Vertical component UZ (Vertical Displacement)
Three-dimensional plots:
Strain pulse under dual wheels
Example - Cost Optimization - 40mm AC14 - GENERAL ANALYSIS
EZZ : Z= 20.000
300
-0.00015 to -0.00014
-0.00014 to -0.00013 250

-0.00013 to -0.00012
-0.00012 to -0.00011 200

-0.00011 to -0.00010
-0.00010 to -0.00009 150

-0.00009 to -0.00008
εZZ Vertical strain
-0.00008 to -0.00007 100
-0.00007 to -0.00006
-0.00006 to -0.00005 50
-0.00005 to -0.00004
-0.00004 to -0.00003 0
-0.00003 to -0.00002
-0.00002 to -0.00001 -50
-0.00001 to -0.00000
-0.00000 to 0.00001 -100
0.00001 to 0.00002
0.00002 to 0.00003 -150
0.00003 to 0.00004
0.00004 to 0.00005 -200
0.00005 to 0.00006
-250
0.00006 to 0.00007
0.00007 to 0.00008
-300
0.00008 to 0.00009 -350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
3-D Plots: Strain pulse under dual wheels
Example - Cost Optimization - 40mm AC14 - GENERAL ANALYSIS
ETH : Z= 50.0 mm depth
120.0
Maximum Horizontal
0.00008
75u
Tensile Strain
0.00007
50u
ETH
0.00006 25u
0
0.00005
-25u
0.00004 250
0.00003
0
0.00002 0
25
0.00001
0
0.00000
-25
0
-0.00001 0
-25
-0.00002 - Right mouse click for Graph menu

- Wheel rotates plot
-0.00003
Graph Menu:
Contour & Carpet plots:
Select: Carpet Plot
Note sliders to
rotate/tilt plot
Plots of Strain Ezz 475 mm depth (top subgrade)
Carpet Plot
Line Plot
Contour Colour/Line Plots
Introduction to CIRCLY 7.0 User Interface
CIRCLY 7.0 Toolbar
There are 4 icons to setup Austroads Designs:
6 or more icons used for other Design Methods:

Austroads Pavement Design (2017)
System
 Can create a CIRCLY job by selecting icons in any order
* *
*Layers & Materials databases used by all Design Methods

To start a new Job – select (click ‘New’ button)
Enter job name

The Navigator Panel
Note Design Method

Design Method Choices:
Four options
Click to select
Design Method
 Austroads Pavement Design (2017) – TLD required

 General Design: define own wheel loadings, traffic mix &
calculate CDFs (Cumulative Damage Factors) - TLD not required
 General Analysis: define wheel loadings, calculate & plot selected

results (strains, displacements & stresses) at selected depths (Z’s)
 Haul Road Design: mine haul road design

General Design and General Analysis
Design Methods
Design Method Loads and Traffic Results and Graphs

General Design define your own wheel loadings calculate Cumulative Damage Factors:
and traffic mix - Note Traffic Load CDFs
Distribution - TLD not required
General Analysis define your own wheel loadings calculate and graph selected results
(strains, displacements and stresses)
at selected Z-values (depths)
General Design General Analysis

Damage CDF plot Strain Eyy plot
*See Bonus Exercise 3: Specialised Vehicle Six Axle Mobile Crane (App J AGPT02-17)
General Design and General Analysis
Design Methods
CIRCLY 7 Courses include these:

https://ops.pavement-science.com.au/courses/circly-7-0
General Design
General Analysis
To open an existing job – click Open
List of existing jobs

To open Recent job – use menu File | Recent Files
Demonstration of job assembly
from existing components
Navigation Panel NDT “Design Traffic”
NDT = cumulative number of Heavy

aaaaaVehicle Axle Groups (HVAG)
aaaaaover design period
NDT for example, 5E7 (5 x 107)
AGPT02-17 Section 7.4

Procedure for Determining z.
zzzTotal Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups
How to use Project Reliability
Click to select
Project Reliability
Vicroads Code of Practice No. RC500.22. - Dec 2018
Queensland Pavement Design Supplement June 2021
NSW Roads and Maritime Services – August 2018

Traffic Load Distribution (TLD) Screen
Filter by State
Traffic Load Distribution (TLD) Screen
Note State combo is ‘QLD’
*** Sort Column by

clicking on Heading
Layered Systems Screen
Gran_500
475 mm thick
CIRCLY automatically
sublayers Granular
Layer No. 1: Gran_500 Sub_CBR5
Aust2017-1 Layers
0 = Infinite
Results:
 With all data defined, run the analysis by clicking
No Damage Factor for Granular
Cumulative Damage Factor
CDF Subgrade Perm. Def. = design traffic n / allowable loading N
= ESA/HVAG x NDT / = 0.651
ε = vertical strain CIRCLY result = 0.0009056

View Result Files
Click ‘Print’
Job Summary File is opened
Note slider to view file

View Result Files
Bottom of Job Summary File
Vertical Strain result = 0.0009056 (905.6με)
CDF = ESA/HVAG x NDT /

= 0.7 x 1.0E7 / (0.00915/0.0009056)7
= 0.651
View Result Files
Cement3000 CDF
SAST
SADT
TAST
TADT
TRDT
QADT
Can Export and Plot in

Excel: Each Axle Group
CDF for Cement3000
Click ‘Print’
Click .CLO File (printable' results)
Scroll past the input

‘Details of layered System’
to the 2nd set of data (as above)
which includes the automatic
5 granular sublayer details
Automatic Thickness Design (see later)
Cumulative Damage Factors
You can edit any Thickness here

CDF shown in red as design loading exceeds allowable
loading as Total Damage for cemented material > 1
Exercise 1:
Job assembly from existing components
 Select ICONS in any order to assemble CIRCLY job
 Exercises include colour coded operations:

ICON to select; TASK to be completed; ACTION required
ICON TASK: ACTION

 Job Name: Exercise 1
Exercise 1:
Job assembly from existing components
ICON TASK: ACTION
 Layered System:
Aust2017-3 Austroads 2017- Example 3- Asphalt Pavement containing Cemented Layer
(Not Aust2017-3P ‘Post Cracked’)
 Traffic Load Distribution:

 State: Example
 ID: _Example
 Traffic (NDT): 1E7 ( 107)
 Project Reliability: 95% Austroads AGPT02-17 App L.3

Asphalt Pavement Containing
 Run Analysis Cemented Material Subbase
Exercise 1: - Answers
CDF red as > 1
Click link for video of exercise steps

https://pavement-science.com.au/softover/circly/circly5demos-2/
How to create a Layered System
Thickness Modulus, Ev Poisson's

(mm) (MPa) Ratio
Unbound Granular Course 500 (top layer) +

Layer No. 1 475 0.35
(Austroads sublayering) variable as sublayered*
Layer No. 2
Subgrade Infinite 50 0.45
CBR = 5%
*CIRCLY automatically sublayers

Unbound Granular Layer No. 1
1
2
Maximum 20 characters
Maximum 72 characters
Selected Layered System is highlighted
Initially start with no Layers

Click New to add each Layer -

start with top layer
Layers numbered
1 from top
Build pavement
top down
1 Select Unbound Granular Material type from list
3
Start from Top
2 Select Granular
4 Add thickness
2 Select Subgrade from Material type from list
4
3 Select Subgrade
1
Set Thickness = 0 for infinite depth subgrade

How to change a Layer’s Material
Click anywhere on the Material ID or Title

How to change a Layer’s Material
Select new Material and click OK

Exercise 2:
Creation of a new Layered System
 Layered System (use existing materials):

 Create new Layered System, using ID = Ex2, Title = Exercise 2
 Asphalt: Material Type = Asphalt  just select this in Material Type combo box!
 ID = AC20, Thickness = 220 mm (E = 2500MPa, v=0.4)
 Subgrade: Material Type = Subgrade (Austroads 2017)  select via combo box!
 ID = Sub_CBR5, Thickness = 0 (CBR = 5, Ev = 50MPa, v = 0.45)

 State: Example
 ID: _Example
 Traffic (NDT): 1E7
 Project Reliability: 95%
 Run Analysis
Exercise 2:
Creation of a new Layered System (cont.)
Correct answers:

How to modify CIRCLY 7.0 databases:
Material Properties database
Select Material Type

CIRCLY Material Properties database
Material Type:
Use with Austroads 2017
Note Unbound Granular

Austroads 2004 sub-layering
used by Austroads 2017
Unbound Granular
No sub-layering
CIRCLY 7.0 Materials database - June 2021
• Note can be downloaded from QLD TMR
CIRCLY 7.0 database material type Material description

Asphalt-AC10 Size 10 mm dense graded asphalt, with
11.5% binder (by volume)
Asphalt-EME2 High modulus asphalt, with Transport and Main
Roads EME2 fatigue relationship
Asphalt-existing cracked / low Existing asphalt (cracked/low modulus) (no fatigue)
modulus (no fatigue)
Asphalt-OG Size 10 mm or 14 mm open graded asphalt
Asphalt-SMA10 Size 10 mm stone mastic asphalt, with
Asphalt-SMA14 Size 14 mm stone mastic asphalt, with
Asphalt-user defined User defined
Cement stabilised (heavily bound) Heavily bound stabilised granular material or lean
mix concrete
Foamed bitumen stabilised granular Foamed bitumen stabilised granular (either insitu or
plant-mixed), includes options for binder volumes
(Vb) of 7.0, 7.5 and 8.0%
Lightly bound (no sublayering) Lightly bound granular base, lightly bound granular
subbase or lightly bound granular improved layer
Subgrade – lime stabilised (no Lime stabilised subgrade
sublayering)
Subgrade - Fill or subgrade treatments
Selected (AGPT02 sublayering)
Subgrade (AGPT02) Existing subgrade materials
Triple blend subbase Triple blend stabilised subbase
Unbound granular (AGPT02 Unbound granular material
sublayering)
Unbound granular (no sublayering) Unbound granular material when sublayering is not
required (for example, cracked cemented material)
Asphalt
Elastic Volume of
Properties Binder
Asphalt
Performance / Fatigue Shift

Properties Factor
Asphalt
Performance /
repetitions to failure Fatigue Properties
horizontal tensile strain 

at underside of layer
Subgrade
Austroads Subgrade always has

same Performance relationship
Unit Costs
Adding New Material Data
1
2 Choose
Material Type
3
Click New
button
Enter Material ID (<=20 chars.)

Enter Title (<=72 chars.)
Enter Young’s Modulus

Enter Poisson’s Ratio
Exercise 3:
Creation of new material properties
 Job Name:
Exercise 3 - Unbound Granular on CBR=2.5
 Create new subgrade elastic material:
 Material Type = Subgrade (Austroads 2017)  select this via combo box!
 ID = Sub_CBR2.5
 Title = Subgrade, CBR2.5, Aniso
 Elastic properties: Anisotropic, Ev = 25 MPa, Poisson’s Ratio = 0.45

Exercise 3:
Creation of new material properties (cont.)
 Create New Layered System (use existing materials):
 use ID = Ex3, Title = Exercise 3
 Unbound Granular:
 Material Type = Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering)
 ID = Gran_500 (therefore max. Ev = 500 MPa at top)
 Thickness = 450 mm
 Subgrade:
 Material Type= Subgrade (Austroads 2017)
 ID = Sub_CBR2.5
 Thickness = 0
 State: Example
 ID: _Example
 Run Analysis
Exercise 3:
Creation of new material properties (cont.)
Correct answer = 107

Exercise 3a:
Design iteration
 Using Job Exercise 3 with the Layered System Ex3
 Your goal is to determine the thickness of the granular layer to nearest 10 mm
so that Subgrade CDF is just less than 1.0
 Try different granular layer thicknesses (each one a multiple of 10 mm)
 Add an entry to this table for each configuration that you analyse:
Granular layer Subgrade
Thickness (mm) CDF
450 107
500 ?
Change thickness here &
500.00
???
Exercise 3a:
Design iteration
Granular layer Subgrade

Thickness (mm) CDF
450 107
500 21.0
550 4.7
Correct answer 600 1.7
620 1.16
630 0.957
Exercise 4:
Creation of new Asphalt Properties
 Job Name: Exercise 4 - Full depth asphalt pavement
 Create a new Asphalt as follows:

 Material Type = Asphalt  select this via combo box!
 ID = Asph2200
 Title = Asphalt, E = 2200 MPa, VB = 10%
 Young’s Modulus = 2200
 Poisson’s ratio, v = 0.4
 VB (Volume of Binder) = 10
 Exponent (b) = 5.0
Performance Constant (k) automatically calculated = 0.004176
 Shift Factor = 6.0
Exercise 4:
Full depth asphalt pavement
 New Layered System (use existing materials):
 use ID= Ex4, Title = Exercise 4
 Material Type = Asphalt

ID = Asph2200, Thickness = 240 mm
(E = 2200 MPa, v = 0.4)
 Material Type = Subgrade (Austroads 2017)

ID=Sub_CBR5, Thickness = 0
(Ev = 50MPa, v = 0.45)

 State: Example
 ID: _Example

 Run Analysis
Exercise 4:
Full depth asphalt pavement (cont.)
Correct answers:

Automatic Thickness Design:
Determine optimum thickness of a given layer
1
Open existing Job:
Austroads 2017 - Example 2 – Full Depth Asphalt Pavement (App. L.2 AGPT02-17)
4 Click Analyse
2 Tick box
3 Click to highlight
layer to design
weakest link
highest CDF
5 Result
*Note 200 seed value determines Automatic Thickness Design answer of 188.72
Exercise 5: – Project Reliability
 Examine influence of Project Reliability on design thickness
 Open job: “Austroads 2017- Example 2 - Full Depth Asphalt Pavement”
 Use Automatic Thickness Design to determine 2nd Asphalt Layer AC20
thickness (previous slide) for the alternative Project Reliabilities below:
Project Reliability Design Thickness of 2nd

Asphalt Layer
(mm)
97.5% 188.7
95% ?
90%
85%
80%
50%
Exercise 5: – Project Reliability
Automatic Thickness Design determined 2nd Asphalt Layer AC20
thickness for the following Project Reliabilities:
Project Reliability Design Thickness of 2nd

Asphalt Layer
(mm)
97.5% 188.7
95% 175.2
90% 162.4
85% 154.9
80% 148.7
50% 126.3
Exercise 5a: – “Design Traffic” - NDT
Now examine influence of NDT on design thickness:
Set 2nd Asphalt Layer AC20 thickness = 200 mm starting seed value
NDT = 1E7 and Project Reliabilty = 97.5%
Use Automatic Thickness Design to determine 2nd Asphalt layer
AC20 thickness for the following NDT values:
NDT Design Thickness of
Cumulative number of Heavy Vehicle 2nd Asphalt Layer
Axle Groups (HVAG) over design period
(mm)
1.0E+7 188.7
5.0E+6 ?
1.0E+6
2.0E+7
5.0E+7
The Automatic Thickness Design determined 2nd Asphalt Layer

AC20 thickness for the values of NDT :
NDT Design Thickness of

Cumulative number of Heavy Vehicle 2nd Asphalt Layer
Axle Groups (HVAG) over design period
(mm)
1.0E+7 188.7*
5.0E+6 167.5
1.0E+6 124.7
2.0E+7 211.7
5.0E+7 244.6
*seed of 200 mm
Design thickness of 2nd Asphalt Layer vs NDT
Design Thickness 2nd Asphalt (mm) 300
250
200
+12%
+100% y = 30.501Ln(x) - 299.95
150
100
50
0
1.00E+06 1.00E+07 1.00E+08
NDT (HVAG)
Log scale shows a constant rate (slope) of change

Exercise 5b: Varying the TLD
Trial QLD most extreme and median ESA/HVAG TLDs:

ID of TLD Name ESA/HVAG %HVs
30042 - West Gore Highway - South... 0.436 18.0
83159 - West 83159 - Peak Downs… 1.285 19.4
110051 - South Kennedy Highway - ... 2.139 8.0
also ‘_Example’ from Examples (Austroads Guide, Appendix G)
_Example Example traffic load… 0.7
Pavement structure:
Austroads 2017 - Example 2 - Full Depth Asphalt Pavement
(App. L.2 AGPT02-17)

Open existing Job:
Austroads 2017 - Example 2 – Full Depth Asphalt Pavement
check
check AC20 is the weakest link
Change TLD: 1 State combo is ‘QLD’ 2 Click Heading to Sort Column
3 Select
Automatic Thickness Design
1 Tick box
2 Click row 2 to highlight layer

to design
3 Click Analyse
New thickness = 169.0 (seed value determines answer)
Complete table with AC20 thickness (Layer 2) for remaining TLDs
ID of TLD Name ESA/HVAG mm
_Example Example traffic load… 0.7 188.7
110051 - South Kennedy Highway - ... 2.139 ?
83159 - West 83159 - Peak Downs… 1.285 ?
 State: Qld
 ID: 110051 - South
 Run Analysis
?? mm
 State: Qld
 ID: 83159 - West
 Run Analysis
?? mm
Example of Steps ‘110051 – South’
1 State combo is ‘QLD’ 2 Click Heading to Sort Column
3 Select
New thickness = 238.91 cf 169.0 (seed value determines answer)

ID of TLD Name ESA/HVAG mm
_Example Example traffic load… 0.7 188.7
110051 - South Kennedy Highway - ... 2.139 238.9
83159 - West 83159 - Peak Downs… 1.285 219.7
Note constant NDT but impact of different traffic mix (ESA/HVAG)
Thickness vs ESA/HVAG (Sensitivity of ESA/HVAG)
Log scale shows a constant rate (slope) of change

Exercise 5b: Varying the TLD:
TADT Average Load vs TLD (ESA/HVAG)
ESA/HVAG
TADT 210 kN proportion
TADT Standard Axle Load 135 kN

TLDs with same ESA/HVAG:
ESA/HVAG = 1 (WA: Kunu & VIC: Wan)
CDF bound materials (Asphalt & Cemented) different as calculated for

each particular individual load & axle group (every cell in the TLD)
***Note traffic mix impacts the results despite both ESA/HVAG = 1
CDF Subgrade (Perm. Def. - rutting) same as both ESA/HVAG = 1 (same DESA )
TLDs with same ESA/HVAG
Both WA: Kunu & VIC: Wan = 1.0
Traffic mix impacts results - Note both ESA/HVAG = 1

AC20
Kunu CDF:
1.30
Wan 1.14
ESA/HV
Heavier loads Kunu : Wan
4.04 : 3.32
CIRCLY 7.0 Hands On and more
• Powerful CIRCLY 7.0 Features

• Workshop exercises
Powerful CIRCLY 7.0 features
Cost Calculation
+
Automatic Parametric Analysis
=
A Powerful Tool for
Pavement Cost Optimization
Background to Cost Calculation
Existing job: “Example - Cost Optimization”
Total Cost
No CDF as no Granular performance No CDF for AC14 surface asphalt

(fatigue) relationship as compressive strains only
CIRCLY PLOT
No Damage Factor for AC14 surface

asphalt (compressive strains only)
Tension
Cost Calculation
Costs tab
Asphalts: use either
Entry of Unit Material Costs
Geosynthetics, etc
density
$115 x 2.5 = $287.50

Examples of Unit cost rates:
Material Code Unit Cost $
Size 10 mm OGA , 30 mm thickness OGA m2 14.28
Size 14 mm dense graded asphalt. 40 mm thick (intersection mixes) C320 binder DGA14(C320) m2 19.04
Size 14 mm dense graded asphalt, 40 mm thick, intersection mix with A15E binder DGA14(A15E) m2 21.71
Size 14 mm dense graded asphalt, 40 mm thick, intersection mix with A35P binder DGA14(A35P) m2 21.71
Size 14 mm dense graded asphalt, 50 mm thick (intersection mixes) C320 binder DGA14(C320)50 m2 23.80
Size 14 mm dense graded asphalt, 50 mm thick, intersection mix with A15E binder DGA14(A15E)50 m2 27.14
Size 14 mm dense graded asphalt, 50 mm thick, intersection mix with A35P binder DGA14(A35P)50 m2 27.14
2 coat emulsion seal EmulsionSeal m2 7.63
Tack coat Tack m2 1.13
Size 14 mm dense graded asphalt C320 binder, intermediate DGA14(m3) m3 476.05
Size 20 mm dense graded asphalt C320 binder, intermediate DGA20(m3) m3 476.05
Crushed rock base CRB m3 103.72
HCTCRB HCTCRB m3 158.00
Crushed limestone subbase Limestone m3 98.62
Gravel subbase Gravel m3 44.69
2% cement treated crushed rock subbase CTCR m3 166.50
Lean concrete subbase (screened wet), inc. bitumen emulsion seal for curing/bonding LCS m3 531.54 |
Perth region large scale works 2013: Jameson, G, et. Al. ‘Whole-of-life-cycle costing of road pavement
configurations’ WA Pavement Asset Research Centre WAPARC 2011/02 ARRB Group Vermont Sth Vic.
Material Code Unit Cost (ex-GST)
Dense Graded Asphalt – supply & place DGA tonne 210.00
FBS Insitu Stabilisation - 250 mm depth with nominally 3% bitumen FBS m2 60.00
Cement treated crushed rock - supply & place Cement - CR tonne 65.00
Type A Select Fill - supply & place Fill - A tonne 40.00
Size 10 mm Emulsion primer seal SEAL -10 m2 15.00
Size 10 SAMI seal SAMI - 10 m2 12.00
Victoria 2020: A few typical construction rates
 Automatically loop through one or two thickness ranges

e.g. from 150 mm to 200 mm in steps of 10 mm
Loop
Thickness
t
Auto Design
Thickness
 Fix Layer 1 T1 thickness to 40 mm

 Let Layer 2 thickness T2 vary 150 mm to 200 mm in 10 mm steps
 Auto. Design Layer 3 thickness T3 for each Layer 2 thickness
Unit Cost
Thickness
Asphalt: Size 14, (AC14) $287.5 / m3
T1 = 40 mm (Fixed)
T2 = 150 to 200mm
(10 mm steps) Asphalt: Size 20, (AC20) $287.5 / m3
t
T3 = ? Crushed Rock: 20 mm , Class 4 $47 / m3
(Auto. Design)
Subgrade, CBR = 3
Cost Optimization Case Study
Summary of Results
Layer 1 t = 40 mm (fixed)
Loop
Thickness
t
Design
Thickness
Layer 2 Layer 3 Max. CDF
Thickness Thickness
10mm increments
150 1332 1.0

160 798 1.0 Many thickness
170 526 1.0 combinations are
180 330 1.0 valid designs
190 225 1.0
200 100 (min.) 0.94
Minimum thickness constraint as unconstructable < 100 mm

(unbound granular pavements with asphalt surfacings < 100 mm use min. 100 mm of crushed rock base)
Summary of Results – add Total Cost
Loop Design
Thickness Thickness
Layer 2 Layer 3 Max. CDF Total Cost
Thickness Thickness ($/m2)
150 1332 1.0 117.7
160 798 1.0 95.0
170 526 1.0 85.1
180 330 1.0 78.7
190 225 1.0 76.7
200 100 (min.) 0.94 73.7
Parametric part
Minimum Cost $
Summary of Results
 Many thickness combinations are valid designs
 Unit Material Costs are the missing dimension…..
Layer 2 Thickness
Layer 3 Thickness
Total Cost ($/m2) 40 mm
Minimum Cost $
1 2 3 4 5 6
All valid designs
CIRCLY 7.0 Cost Optimization:
How it works…. Steps involved
 Fix Layer 1 T1 thickness to 40 mm
 Let Layer 2 thickness T2 vary 160 mm to 240 mm in 10 mm steps
 Auto. Design Layer 3 thickness T3 for each Layer 2 thickness
Unit Cost
Thickness
Asphalt: Size 14, (AC14) $287.5 / m3
T1 = 40 mm (Fixed)
T2 = 160 to 240mm
(10 mm steps) Asphalt: Size 20, (AC20) $287.5 / m3
t
T3 = ? Crushed Rock: 20 mm , Class 4 $47 / m3
(Auto. Design)
Subgrade, CBR = 3
Cost Optimization:
How to Setup Parametric Analysis
7 Run Analysis 6 Make sure Calculate Cost is ticked
4 Tick Design thickness.. & 5 Layer 3
1 Tick Use Parametric

3 Enter 100 Minimum Thickness
2 Make Variable No. 1 Layer 2 and specify the range of thicknesses

to use which varies from 160 mm to 240 mm in 10 mm steps so enter
the values: Minimum: 160, Maximum: 240, Step: 10
Loop Thickness
Note Progress bar while analysis is running
How it works….
Automatically generated plot:

Total Cost vs Layer 2 Thickness
Minimum Total $ Cost

How it works….
 Automatically generated plot: Max. CDF vs. Layer 2 Thickness
Damage Factor = 1.0
Note as layer 2 thickness becomes > 200 mm

CDF becomes < 1.0 as minimum thickness of
layer no. 3 constrained to 100 mm
200
Exercise 6: Cost Optimization
Thickness
(mm)
New Material
Asphalt: Vicroads Mix Type: SG, Size: 20,
100 to add
Binder Class: Multigrade, Speed: 80 km/h
200 Crushed Rock: Vicroads Class 4, 20 mm ID = Gran_150

(in database)
Subgrade: CBR = 3% ID = Sub_CBR3

(in database)
Exercise 6:
Job Name, Traffic, Project Reliability
 Traffic
Traffic Load Distribution:
State: VIC
ID: gis
Name: gis - Calder Freeway - Macedon Ranges – N
Traffic (NDT): 6.0E7
 Project Reliability: 97.5%
Exercise 6:
Creation of new Asphalt
 Create a new Asphalt as follows:
 Asphalt: Material Type = Asphalt  select in Material Type combo box!
 ID = VicSG20S80
 Title = Vicroads Mix Type SG, Size 20, Binder Class Multigrade,
Speed 80 km/h
Properties
 Modulus = 3900.0
 VB(%) = 0.0 (so need to manually input ‘k’ value)
 Performance Exponent (b) = 5.0
 Performance Constant (k) = 0.00352
Exercise 6:
 Create New Layered System
 use ID = Ex6, Title = Exercise 6
Asphalt:
 Material Type = Asphalt
 ID = VicSG20S80
 ID = Gran_150
 Subgrade:
 ID = Sub_CBR3
 Thickness = 0
Exercise 6:
Results
Make sure ‘Design thickness of ..’ is unticked
If was ticked – un-tick & re-set Gran_150 to 200 mm and re-run
No CDF as no Granular performance relationship

Exercise 6: Part B
1 Tick ‘Design thickness of ..’ & 2 Layer 2 Gran_150
3 Change Asphalt Layer 1 thickness from 100 to 250 mm

Automatic Thickness Design feature will design thickness of
aGranular Layer 2 that produces a CDF = 1
Exercise 6: Part B
Results
Exercise 6: Part C
Cost Optimization
Thickness (mm) Unit Cost

T1 = 200 to 400 mm Add cost
(25 mm steps)
Asphalt: Vicroads Mix Type: SG, Size: 20,
t Binder Class: Multigrade, Speed: 80 km/h $125 / tonne
Crushed Rock: Vicroads Class 4, 20 mm

T2 = ? (Auto Design) (Unbound Granular, ID = Gran_150) $47 / m3
Subgrade: CBR = 3
Exercise 6: Part C
Cost Optimization - Unit Costs
 Asphalt: add cost to database
 ID: VicSG20S80
 Title: Vicroads Mix Type SG, Size 20,
Binder Class Multigrade, Speed 80 km/h
 Price per tonne: 125
enter these properties
 Weight/volume: 2.5
$125 x 2.5 = $312.50

 Crushed Rock:
 This material is already in Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering)
database with ID = Gran_150
 Price/Volume: $47 (check already set)
Exercise 6: Part C
Cost Optimization – Set up Parametric Analysis
8 Run Analysis 7 Make sure Calculate Cost is ticked
5 Tick Design thickness.. & 6 Layer 2

9 400 =
Finished
1 Tick Use Parametric 3 Enter 100 4 Enter 100
2 Make Variable No. 1 Layer 1 and specify the range of thicknesses

to use which varies from 200 mm to 400 mm in 25 mm steps so
enter the values: Minimum: 200, Maximum: 400, Step: 25
*Note Layer 1 final Maximum iteration t = 400 mm shown - not the minimum cost
Graph: Total Cost vs Asphalt VicSG20S80 Thickness
Select “Total Cost”
Minimum Total $ Cost:

Layer 1 thickness resolved to 25 mm
(step size)

Graph: CDF (Asphalt) vs. Asphalt Thickness
Select CDF (Select Layer =>) Select Vicroads Mix Type SG …. (Layer No. 1)
Damage factor for asphalt layer
1
Fatigue in asphalt with granular
default max = 5000 mm thick
2
Max. Damage
Factor = 1.0
Due to min granular
thickness = 100 mm
Graph:
Granular Layer Thickness vs. Asphalt Thickness
Select “Thickness (Layer used for Thickness Design)” (Layer No. 2)
granular default max = 5000 mm thick

Thickness Design Layer Number 2
Due to set min granular

thickness = 100 mm
Graph Tips and Tricks:
Hover mouse over data point
hover mouse over a data point
hand icon appears
Numerical values
displayed here:
Customizing the Y-axis to log scale
1 Right mouse click

to give Graph menu
2 Click Customization Dialog

3 Click on Axis
4 Click on (*) Log
5 Click on OK
Layer 2 granular
thickness = 100 mm
Exporting data
1 Right mouse click

to give Graph menu
2 Click Export Dialog

Exporting data
1 Click Text/Data
2 Click Export
Exporting data
1 Click Maximum Precision
2 Click Export
Graph:
Exporting data
The data is now on the Clipboard in this format:

Point no. X Y
1 200 297.5 Can paste into
2 225 305.3125 Excel, Word etc.
3 250 163.7447
4 275 121.5994
5 300 106.1746
6 325 106.2625
7 350 114.075
8 375 121.8875
9 400 129.7
Post-Cracking Phase in
Cemented Materials
Pre-Cracking Phase Post-Cracking Phase

Asphalt
Unbound granular material Unbound granular material
Cemented granular material

Broken into blocks
with no remaining
Subgrade tensile capacity
Subgrade
Other layers extend fatigue life
Austroads AGPT02-17 Section 8.2.6

Post - Cracking Phase in
Cemented Materials
Assumption for use:
to reduce the risk of reflective cracking to the surface the
pavement should provide a minimum cover:
 thickness of asphalt on cemented material >= 175 mm, or
 (0.75 x thickness of granular material cover) +
(thickness of asphalt cover) >= 175 mm
Assumed ‘cracked’ post-fatigue phase material properties:
Cross-Anisotropic, (Ev/Eh degree of anisotropy of 2)
Vertical modulus = 500 MPa or 1/5th initial design modulus if less
Poisson's Ratio = 0.35
layer is not sub-layered
Austroads AGPT02-17
Cement-Treated Base (CTB) Pavements
8.2.6: Consideration of Post-cracking Phase in
Cemented Material & Lean-mix Concrete
State What the supplement says

NSW Excludes post-cracking phase of cemented material in the subbase layer in the
design life of heavy-duty pavements: DESA >= 107 ESA & 20/40 year service life
Design cemented material in the subbase layer to not fatigue during design period
Acceptable for post-cracking phase in lighter traffic roads: DESA < 107 ESA
Queensland Accepted
SA No allowance for the post-cracking phase of design life for heavy-duty pavements
incorporating cemented materials. Acceptable to include the post-cracking phase of
cemented materials, if agreed by the project manager, for other road pavements
where the design traffic is < 107 ESA
Victoria Accepted
WA Engineering Road Note 9 (ERN9 2018) – due out
AGPT02 (2017) Cemented materials - Added to ERN9 (2018) with WA context ?
Total allowable loading (ESA) 1st (pre-) and 2nd (post-) Phase life:
Asphalt
Fatigue:
(using strains found in print-out)
Subgrade
Permanent
Deformation:
Nc = allowable load repetitions cemented material fatigue 1st life

(assumption is cemented layer fails first)
Note: all the N parameters are expressed in ESA Austroads AGPT02-17
1st
Pre- and Post-Cracking Phase in
Cemented Materials 2nd
Pre-cracking Post-cracking Total Allowable

(ESAs) (ESAs) Loading (ESAs)
Cemented 2.22 × 106 n/a n/a
Fails 1st Weakest link
(0.222/1.53 x 20)
= 2.9 years
Asphalt 1.78 × 1011 1.31 × 107 1.53 × 107
(2nd layer) 2nd Weakest link (assume = 20 years)
(1.31/1.53 x 20) and no traffic growth
= 17.1 years
Subgrade 2.88 × 1011 4.21×109 4.21 x 109
Perm.
Deform.
Design ESA Loading, DESA = 0.7 × 107
Austroads 2017, Example L.3: Asphalt Pavement Containing Cemented Material Subbase
= CIRCLY 7.0 Example 3
Traffic Load Distributions:
Importing your own
 Traffic Load Distribution (TLD) import is via a .csv

(Comma Separated Values) data file
 The .csv file contains TLD by Proportion of axle groups

of each type and load (not Percentages)
 Spreadsheet programs can be used to create the .csv

file from TLD data if expressed as Percentages
(convert from Percentages to Proportion)
TLD as % versus TLD as Proportions
Load distribution by proportion of each axle group type and load calculated
from TLD as %: i.e. 0.2804 /100* x 0.393 = 0.001102 (*100 as %)
Note need a QADT column
1 3
Data format for Importing TLD

must be fully populated
Check Sum of each column = Proportion Sum of all cells = 1.0

Sum of each column = 100%
How to create TLD data for Import
The first row must be:

Load SAST SADT TAST TADT TRDT QADT
Proportion Data imported to a new

Worksheet for saving as a .CSV file
Sum of all cells = 1.0 (checked by CIRCLY)
Note data to be exported stops at last load

Import TLD data from existing .csv file
1 Make sure State combo is set correctly – here ‘Example’

2 Click Import to create a new TLD
3 Input a unique ID and Name (description) for the new TLD

4 Click OK to select .csv file
5 Note path to .csv file
6 Select Austroads 2017 Table I.csv file

7 Click Open to import .csv file
Note State combo is set to ‘Example’
.csv ESA/HVAG calculated
Note: the .csv file MUST include QADT

Note State combo is set to ‘Vic’
Values imported and used Values for information only

in CIRCLY calculations and not used in calculations
(can add if required)
Exercise: Import New TLD data
Appendix O: TLDs for Lightly-Trafficked Roads

Table O 6: Example traffic load distribution – minor road
Axle Group Axle Group Type

Load SAST SADT TADT
(kN) % % %
44.1 85.8000 0.0000 0.0000
52.9 14.2000 0.0000 0.0000
53.9 0.0000 80.1120 0.0000
83.1 0.0000 19.8880 0.0000
91.1 0.0000 0.0000 100.0000 Measure Value
Total 100.0000 100.0000 100.0000 Nhvag 2.00
Proportion of ESA/HVAG 0.45
each axle group 0.5 0.357 0.143 ESA/HV 0.89
Austroads AGPT02-17
 Add New Traffic Load Distribution (TLD):
 Click: Import
 State = _Lightly-Trafficked Roads
 ID: = LTR – O6
 Name: = Lightly-Trafficked Roads – O6 – minor road
2 1
 Select Qld TN167 AppE.csv file

3 Input ID and Name
4 Click OK to select .csv file

5 Note path to .csv file:
C:\Users\Public\Documents\Mincad Systems\CIRCLY7.0\CSV examples
6 Select Lightly-Trafficked Roads – O6 – minor road.csv file

7 Click Open to import .csv file
LTR – O6 added
ESA/HVAG = 0.447 calculated

TMR WIM site data
saved as a TLD .csv
for CIRCLY
2 TLD exported in
.csv format for
import to CIRCLY
4
WIM site Data & Classification Count > .csv > CIRCLY 7
Design of Lightly-Trafficked Pavements
Industrial &
heavy
commercial
areas
Figure 12.1: Lightly-trafficked street categories (AGPT02-17)

Road Hierarchy and Classifications
State/territory Arterial Collector Access
ACT Arterial roads Major collector roads Access streets
Minor collector roads
NSW Major arterial Regional roads Local roads
Sub-arterial
NT National highway Collector road Local road
Primary arterial (Urban and Pastoral
Rural) Sub-arterial/rural
secondary or distributor road
Qld Controlled access roads Collector/distributor Local roads
Major roads roads
SA Rural arterial Rural local roads
Urban arterial Urban local roads
Tas Major highways Urban connectors Residential streets
Vic Arterial roads Connector street level 2 Access street level 2
Connector street level 1 Access street level 1
Access place
Access lane
WA Primary distributor Local distributor Access roads
District distributor
Regional distributor
Table 3.7: Road hierarchy terminology across Australia ARRB Sealed Roads
- Best Practice Guide
Design of Lightly-Trafficked Pavements:
ARRB Sealed Roads - Best Practice Guide
Basic understanding & management of sealed local

road pavements (carry generally < 6000 vehicles/day
urban areas & much < rural areas (& < trucks unless
industrial areas, etc)
Consolidates background knowledge of latest
methods in pavement design procedures,
developments in road surfacing technology & road
building practices for sealed local roads in urban,
rural & remote areas around Australia
Strong focus on pavement management requirements

for sealed local roads, & addresses the main topics of
design, construction, maintenance & rehabilitation
https://www.arrb.com.au/bestpracticeguides
AUS-SPEC
Roadworks & bridges
Technical specification system for management of minor infrastructure - covers
planning & design, tendering & contract preliminaries, construction, maintenance &
operations of minor roads: see Design Worksections: 0042 Pavement design; 0053
Rural pavement design – sealed & 0054 Rural pavement design – unsealed
Worksection Template procedures - design & documentation of new flexible
pavements & rehabilitation of existing pavements consisting of: unbound granular
materials, that contain one or more bound layers, including containing asphalt
layers other than thin asphalt wearing surfaces, etc
https://www.aus-spec.com.au/aus-spec-roadworks-and-bridges/
Example of use:
ACT Municipal infrastructure design standards (MIS) – 03 Pavement Design (Sect 3.3)
Design flexible pavements containing one or more bound layers, including cement
stabilised layers or thick asphalt layers other than thin asphalt surfacings, using
mechanistic design in AGPT02 Sect. 8 - use a project reliability of 95%
Requirement: pavement thickness at least 10 mm > than the calculated thickness
for thick asphalt pavements, or 20 mm > for pavements containing cemented
materials & additional thickness to the most critical layer for the design, etc
Table 12.2: Indicative Heavy Vehicle Axle Group volumes
for lightly-trafficked urban streets
Use Table 12.2 when no HV traffic count data: Note NDT & DESA based on street
type & with HV traffic count data: Calc. NDT via NHVAG (Eq.35) & Calc. DESA (Eq.37)
Table 12.2: NDT and DESA when no heavy vehicle count
NHVAG N DESA
DT
DESA < 105

Use Fig. 12.2: Design chart for lightly-
trafficked granular pavements with
thin bituminous surfacings
DESA > 105

Use Mechanistic Design: CIRCLY
& all pavements containing one or
more bound layers at any DESA
- permanent deformation & asphalt
fatigue distresses AGPT02-17
Empirical Design: Lightly-Trafficked Pavements
Figure 12.2: Design chart for lightly-trafficked granular pavements with
aaaaaaaaaaathin bituminous surfacings (traffic loadings < 105 ESA)
Thickness of
Material (mm)
• Unbound granular base
a& subbases courses:
acrushed rocks &
natural gravels
• Selected subgrades
• Lime-stabilised
asubgrades
Design traffic: ≤ 105 ESA: permanent deformation only distress considered

Ch 12. Design of Lightly-Trafficked Pavements ( < 105 ESA ) AGPT02-17

Table 12.2 provides indicative Heavy Vehicle Axle Group volumes for
lightly-trafficked urban streets (note Direction Factor = 0.5 except Minor
Street with single lane DF = 1.0)
Traffic Load Distributions (TLD) for Lightly Trafficked Roads are defined in
Appendix O – these are available in CIRCLY 7.0
Table 12.2: Indicative Heavy Vehicle Axle Group
volumes for lightly-trafficked urban streets
NDT when no heavy vehicle count
NDT DESA
Collector with no buses

(TLD = LTR - O2)
AGPT02-17
Traffic Load Distributions (TLDs) for Lightly Trafficked Roads

defined in Appendix O – these are available in CIRCLY 7.0:

AGPT02-17
AGPT02-17
Example: Lightly-Trafficked Pavement
Inputs:
NDT DESA TLD for Collector with no buses is defined in
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaAppendix O: LTR - O2 - AGPT02-17
40 yrs
CIRCLY
From Table 12.2 - AGPT02-17
NDT = 1.427 x 106 HVAG

(for 40 yr design period)
From Table 12.2
Pavement Design Speed = 10 km/h
DESA - For calculating Subgrade CDF (see later)

Design number ESA of traffic loading = ESA/HVAG x NDT = 0.588 x 1427004 = 8.4 x 105 ESAs
Wearing course Asphalt 10 mm H 40 mm Asphalt Type H 40 mm

Base Course Asphalt 14 mm H 80 mm Asphalt Type H 80 mm
Granular Base Base Size 20 mm 160 mm

Class 2 Crushed Rock Granular Base and
Subbase combined 340 mm
Subbase Size 20 mm and split into five
Granular Subbase 180 mm
Class 3 Crushed Rock equal sublayers
Subgrade Subgrade CBR=5% Subgrade CBR=5%
Design Pavement Trial Pavement

CIRCLY ‘k’ uses VB (%) & E Asphalt Properties
*Divide Table ‘K’

values by 106 for
CIRCLY asphalt
fatigue constant ‘k’
*
i.e. 5260*= 5260/106

k = 0.00526
Top granular sub-layer EV Eq. 5
Thickness (mm)
Asphalt 10 mm H Table 6.5
High standard
120 mm
Asphalt 14 mm H base material
Base Size 20 mm EV top layer is minimum of value in Table 6.5 (420 MPa), or
Class 2 Crushed Rock
160 Equation 41 (Section 8.2.3) *CIRCLY doesn’t
automatically
Subbase Size 20 mm Total thickness of granular materials* combine granular
Class 3 Crushed Rock (160 + 180) = 340 layers
180 E
V subgrade×2
(total granular thickness/125) = 50×2(340/125) = 329.4 MPa
Subgrade CBR=5%
0 50 MPa (CBR 5%)
Trial Pavement EV top layer minimum = 329.4 MPa
AGPT02-17
Divide total thickness of unbound granular materials into
five equi-thick sublayers AGPT02-17
1
 E top granular sublayer 5 R = (329.4/50)1/5 = 1.458
EV
68 mm R = 
E

329.4
 subgrade  Equation 42
68 mm 225.9 (329.4/1.458)
68 mm 340 mm 155.0 (225.9/1.458)
68 mm 106.3 (155.0/1.458)
68 mm 72.9 (106.3/1.458)
Subgrade
50 (CBR5%)
Vertical Modulus (MPa)

*Note automatically calculated in CIRCLY
 Job Name: Lightly-Trafficked Road - Collector - No Buses

 State: Lightly-Trafficked Roads
 ID: LTR-O2
 Traffic (NDT): 1.427E6

 Create 2 new Asphalt elastic materials:

 Material Type = Asphalt  select this via combo box
 ID = 10_H_10 k* from CIRCLY Calculator
 Title = Size 10 Type H 10km/hr
 Properties: E = 1500 MPa, ν = 0.4, VB = 11.1, b = 5, k*=0.005262, SF = 6
 ID = 14_H_10
 Title = Size 14 Type H 10km/hr
 Create new Layered System using:
 ID = Lightly Trafficked 1
 Title = Lightly Trafficked 1
 Asphalt
 Material Type = Asphalt  select
 ID = 10_H_10
 Asphalt
 Material Type = Asphalt  select
 ID = 10_H_10
 Material Type = Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering)  select
 ID = Gran_350 (therefore max. E = 350MPa at top layer)
 Subgrade:
 ID = Sub_CBR5 (E = 50MPa)
 Thickness = 0
No Damage Factor for 1st Asphalt

CDF base of 2nd Asphalt
Reliability = 90% No Damage Factor for Granular

NDT
CDF top of Subgrade
Design Traffic NDT = 1.427 x 106 HVAG

View Result Files
CDF top of Subgrade

Vertical Strain result = 0.0007168 (716.8με)
DESA
CDF = ESA/HVAG x NDT /
= 8.4 x 1.0E5 / (0.00915/0.0007168)7
= 0.0152
Granular automatic sublayering - CIRCLY
CIRCLY Calculates
EV automatically
EV top granular sublayer =

EV subgrade× 2(top granular thickness /125) = 50 × 2(340/125) = 329.4 MPa
Equation 41 AGPT02-17
AGPT02-17 NDT DESA
Appendix O
Street type TLDs Lightly Design Cumulative HVAG Indicative design Gran_350
Trafficked Roads period (yrs) over Design period Traffic (ESA) t (mm)
Collector with LTR-O2 20 607068 4 x 105 273
no buses 40 1427004 106 331
Collector with LTR-O1 20 1180410 8 x 105 328
buses 40 2774730 2 x 106 515
Granular thickness vs design period / buses

Pavement Rehabilitation
Exercises
Sprayed seal overlying granular pavements >90% Aust/NZ sealed roads
- many under duress with increased traffic and with non-standard

11material layers that are no longer fit-for-purpose
- improving pavement structure by introducing high quality crushed
aarock is often not cost effective in rural areas…
… consequently increasing use of bituminous and cementitious binder

aatreatments to enhance existing materials properties…
… and has added benefit of recycling scarce resources

References:
AGPT05-19 Part 5: Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design

AGPT-T600-18: Flexural beam test methods for cemented materials
Pavement Rehabilitation
Exercises
Guide to Pavement Technology Part 5:
Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design
AGPT05-19
Appendix N: Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation Design
Example
Appendix L: Example of Granular Overlay Thickness
Design Considering Lime Stabilisation
of Subgrade
Appendix K: Cement-stabilised Base Design Example
Appendix J: Asphalt Inlay Design Example
Deflection measuring devices used for
AGPT05-19 thickness design methods
Traffic Speed Deflectometer (TSD) Used to estimate pavement fatigue ….
ARRB’s Intelligent Pavement Assessment Vehicle iPAVe: 7 laser sensors measure continuous
pavement deflection profiles at highway speeds: single pass pavement strength testing for
accurate, cost-effective way of measuring the quality of a road surface and its sub-surface
Improved Methods of Using Pavement Deflection Data in the Design of

Rehabilitation Treatments AP-T350-19 11 Oct 2019
Assess TSD deflection use (determination pavement layer moduli) for
design of pavement structural treatments
Formalise the pavement layer moduli back-calculation algorithm
AustBack for use in mechanistic-empirical pavement treatment design
iPAVe provides continuous pavement deflection profiles so bearing capacity indices
derived & pavement fatigue estimated - high data accuracy & resolution enable
evaluation of areas where the pavement structure may be subject to failure
Hawkeye Insight
Example: thin overlay completed along 1st 19kms of newly paved 26km road due to
high levels of roughness, rutting & cracking
iPAVe data shows two underlying pavement structural problem areas which will lead
to premature road failure
Full rehabilitation could have been performed in these areas providing a more
effective treatment solution had there been a structural evaluation before the overlay
Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation:
can be modelled in CIRCLY
Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation Design Example Resilient to flooding
(Appendix N - AGPT05-19)
Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation Do’s and Don’ts - Damian Volker,

QTMR Pavement Rehabilitation Unit Northern Roads Symposium, Cairns June 2019
Pavement Rehabilitation Case Study
Exercise: Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation (FBS)
Background: Fatigue Criteria
Small quantity
FBS: mixture of air, water & bitumen
cold water • Once foaming agent is mixed expands about 15x
injected into hot • Large surface area & low viscosity
bitumen • mixed with gravel droplets coat the finer particles
that binds them together AGPT05-19
2.5 to 3.5% bitumen by mass
commonly used with
1-2% hydrated lime as a
secondary binder
coats finer particles
- stiffen the bitumen binder

- assist in bitumen dispersion
- improve the initial modulus
- improve early life rut resistance Technical Report AP-T336-18
- reduce moisture sensitivity
- an anti-stripping agent (lime only)
Northern Symposium – June 2019
Fatigue Criteria: FBS

FBS fatigue calculation equation based on asphalt fatigue relationship of AGPT05-19
Note:
No current design procedure to a given Project Reliability level in mechanistic analysis
Use:
Allowable Number of repetitions
of load-induced tensile strain
where με = load-induced maximum tensile strain at FBS base:

note microstrain (με) = 106 x unitless strain (ε)
Vb = volume of binder in FBS material (%), commonly 7%
E = FBS design modulus (MPa)
In CIRCLY use existing modified asphalt fatigue relationship with appropriate inputs:
CIRCLY version with asphalt

fatigue constant (k) and SF/RF x (require SF/RF = 1 so adjust
inputs accordingly – see later)
.
Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation (FBS)
Pavement Design Supplement - TMR Qld June 2021
Calculation of critical strains & result interpretation as for asphalt as detailed in

Tables 8.1 to 8.3 & Sections 8.2.4 & 8.2.5 - AGPT02-17
Section 6.7 Foamed bitumen stabilised materials
Guidance on material requirements, material characterisation for pavement and
mix design of foamed bitumen stabilised materials is provided in:
1) Pavement Rehabilitation Manual: TMR Feb 2020
2) Materials Testing Manual (Part 2): TMR June 2020
& relevant technical specifications
Design modulus E based guidance above for full thickness: mix-dependent
E = 1800 MPa to 2500 MPa at 25ºC - prior to temperature correction
Presumptive design E when unknown mix design details typically E = 1800 MPa
- prior to temperature correction
Overlying asphalt thickness < 100 mm temp. correction applies using Table 6.7.1(a)
The design binder volume Vb is mix-dependent and selected from Table 6.7.1(b)
** Presumptive Vb of 7.0% typically used when details of mix design are unknown
Recent Austroads FBS Research:
Develop new specific laboratory fatigue
relationships to better predict FBS material
performance to optimise pavement designs
General strain-based form of the presumptive

FBS laboratory fatigue relationship
AP-R666-22
E = flexural modulus (MPa)
FS = flexural strength (kPa)
VB = volume of bitumen in the FBS mix in per cent (%)
Note strain damage exponent = 7.8
Next: APT6245 - Develop design procedures for foamed bitumen stabilised pavement
Better understanding of FBS behaviour, more accurate design requirements &
performance model (Laboratory-to-Field Shift Factor for FBS materials to
appropriately predict the in-service fatigue life)
Sprayed Seal Sprayed Seal
Granular
base
Foamed
bitumen
base
Granular
subbase
Granular
subbase
Subgrade Subgrade
Rehabilitation of an unbound granular pavement by strengthening

via foamed bitumen stabilisation of existing granular material:
See: Appendix N - Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation Design Example
Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design AGPT05-19
Sprayed Seal Sprayed Seal Thickness Modulus Ev
Granular 300 mm 2200 MPa

base
Foamed FB Asphalt* FBS2200 *Note Material Type
bitumen (Vb=7% k=0.003064) ‘Foamed Bitumen’
base
Granular
subbase
Granular 100 mm 87 MPa
subbase Unbound Granular Gran_87*
0 mm 50 MPa (CBR 5%)
Subgrade Subgrade
Semi-infinite
Existing Pavement Trial Pavement
*New Materials to add

NDT = 107 cumulative HVAG (20 year design period)
TLD is Appendix G (AGPT02-17) = ID: _Example

Foamed bitumen stabilised (FBS) material assigned:
E = 2200MPa, ν = 0.4 with Vb = 7% and k = 0.003064
**Note for the FBS fatigue calculation using Eq 19 (AGPT05-19) there
currently is no procedure to design to a given Project Reliability level
x CIRCLY version with asphalt

fatigue constant (k) and SF/RF
(In CIRCLY, want SF/RF = 1 so adjust inputs accordingly)

 Job Name: FBS Example

 State: Example
 ID: _Example
Reliability Factors (RF) =

(Asphalt)
 Create a new Foamed Bitumen Asphalt:

 Material Type = Foamed Bitumen  select in Material Type combo box!
 ID = FBS2200 Title = FBS E=2200MPa, Vb=7%
Properties
 Modulus = 2200.0
 VB (%) = 7.0
 Performance Constant (k) = 0.003064 (calculated automatically)
RF 95% = 6 so make SF = 6 gives SF/RF = 1
 Properties: E = 2200 MPa, Poisson’s Ratio =0.4, VB = 7, b = 5, k = 0.003064, SF = ?.?
?.?
For a given RF - change FBS SF = RF (from 1.0 to 9.0) so SF/RF = 1

aa i.e. make SF = 6 for RF 95% = 6 so 6/6 = 1
Reliability Factors (RF) =

(Asphalt/Foamed Bitumen)
Or, if RF 85% = 3 make SF = 3 so SF/RF = 3/3 = 1
 Ev Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering)

Note Ev for top sublayer from Eq. 41 Section 8.2.3 Austroads AGPT02-17:
EV top granular sublayer = EV underlying material × 2(total granular thickness /125) Eq. 41
= 50 x 2(100/125) = 87 MPa (automatically calculated by CIRCLY*)
*300 MPa
reduced to
87 MPa
5 sublayers
* Note any granular > 87 MPa as input & CIRCLY will calculate 87 MPa via Eq. 41
1
 E top granular sublayer 5
Sublayers: R =   R = (87/50)1/5 = 1.117
 E subgrade 
*Note automatically calculated in CIRCLY
Note Subgrade 50 MPa < 87 MPa top layer so can sublayer

(sublayering exception if top E < Es )
EV top granular sublayer = EV underlying material × 2(total granular thickness /125)
100 mm
Ev top granular sublayer = 50 × 1.7411 = 87 MPa
(*reduced from any > E)
*Note automatically calculated in CIRCLY AGPT02-17: Section 8.2.3

Create new Unbound Granular material*:

select this in Material Type combo box
 ID = Gran_87
 Title = Granular, E=87MPa
 Elastic properties: Ev = 87 MPa, Poisson’s Ratio = 0.35
*instead of adding Gran_87, could use any

Granular input with E > 87 MPa already in
the database & CIRCLY will automatically
calculate 87 MPa via Eq.41

 ID = FBS Example
 Title = FBS Example
 Asphalt: Material Type = Foamed Bitumen  select Material Type combo box
 ID = FBS2200, Thickness = 300 mm (E = 2200MPa, v=0.4)
 Material Type = Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering) 
 ID = Gran_87 (or could use any Gran. with an E > 87MPa i.e. Gran_100)
 Subgrade:
 Material Type= Subgrade (Austroads 2017) 
 Thickness = 0
 Run Analysis
Make sure ‘Design thickness of ..’ is unticked

If was ticked – un-tick, re-set thicknesses and re-run
CDF FBS
Reliability = 95% CDF Subgrade

Design Traffic NDT = 1 x 107 HVAG (Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups)
so So 6/6 = 1 so OK
The FBS fatigue damage resulting

from each axle group type = sum
The
of theFBS fatigue
damage damage
caused resulting
by each
fromlevel
load eachfor
axle
thegroup
group. type is the
sum of the damage caused by
each
The load level
damage fromforeach
the group.
axle group
The is
type damage
shownfrombelow.each axle group
type is
Total CDF = 0.8975 < 1 OK.

Total FBS fatigue damage of 0.898 is close to 1 so limited potential to lower FBS
thickness. Can check with Automatic Thickness Design.
3 Analyse 1 Tick box
2 Click on FBS2200 layer to design
Optimum thickness 296mm & CDF = 0.99

Exercise: Lime Stabilisation of Subgrade
A sprayed seal 300 mm unbound granular

pavement of low strength as excessive Sprayed Seal
moisture in the clay subgrade with a New Granular 100 mm
3% design CBR overlay
Removed and
replaced existing
Sprayed Seal 300 mm
unbound Granular
material
Granular
300 mm Lime-stabilized
material
Subgrade CBR=10%
Subgrade CBR=3% Subgrade CBR=3%
Existing Trial Pavement
Granular overlay thickness design considering lime stabilisation of subgrade

Appendix L - Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design AGPT05-19
NDT = 2 x 107 cumulative HVAG (20 year design period)

TLD is Appendix G (AGPT02-17) = ID: _Example & ESA/HVAG of 0.7
Note: Design number of ESA of traffic loading (DESA) =
ESA/HVAG x NDT = 0.7 x 2 x107 = 1.4 x 107 ESAs
A treatment option identified for evaluation was to:
• remove the existing granular materials
• lime stabilise the subgrade to a depth of 250 mm
• replace the existing granular materials
• place a granular overlay over the entire project
• sprayed seal surfacing.
Laboratory testing indicated addition of 5% lime to the clay subgrade was the
minimum content required to achieve long-term changes in material properties:
The design CBR of the lime-stabilised layer is 10%
Method B: Selecting the Lime Content for Long-term Property Changes Sect. 4.8: AGPT04D-19
EV top sub-layer Lime-stabilised Subgrade:

Thickness
Sprayed Seal (mm) EV top sub-layer is minimum:
150 MPa (CBR 15% - maximum normally adopted), or

Granular 10 x Design CBR% (10% from lab. Testing) = 100 MPa, or
400
material
total thickness of granular Eq. 39 (Section 8.2.2):
100 + 300 = 400
Lime-stabilized EV underlying material × 2(thickness stabilised subgrade layer/150)
250
Subgrade CBR = 10%
Subgrade 0 = 30 × 2(250/150) = 95 MPa so use 95 MPa as minimum
CBR=3% 30 MPa
(support of underlying material)
Trial Pavement
Sects. 5.3.8 & 8.2.2 - AGPT02-17

EV top sub-layer Lime-stabilised Subgrade

EV top sublayer = EV underlying mat.× 2(thickness each select. or stab. layer /150)
250 mm
EV lime stab.= 30× 3.1747 = 95.24 MPa
(100 MPa* reduced also any > E )
*Note automatically calculated in CIRCLY AGPT02-17: Section 8.2.2

EV top sub-layer Granular:

Thickness
Sprayed Seal (mm)
EV top granular sub-layer is minimum:
Table 6.3 (Section 6.2.3) normal standard crushed rock

Granular – under sprayed seal
400
material = 350 MPa or
Ev
Lime-stabilized Eq. 41 (Section 8.2.3):
250
Subgrade EV=95MPa
0 EV top stabilised sublayer × 2(thickness granular layer/125)
Subgrade
CBR=3% 30 MPa
= 95 × 2(400/125) = 873 MPa
Trial Pavement
350 MPa is minimum so use for Granular
AGPT02-17
Table 6.3
EV top sub-layer Granular
EV top layer normal standard crushed rock

EV top layer Lime-stabilized Subgrade
= 350 / 95 = 3.6842

CIRCLY
Calculates
automatically

 Job Name: Lime Stabilisation of Subgrade

 State: Example
 ID: _Example


 ID = Lime Stab Subgrade
 Title = Lime Stabilisation of Subgrade
 Material Type = Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering)  select
 ID = Gran_350 (therefore max. E = 350MPa at top layer)
 Subgrade Selected Material (Lime stabilised subgrade):
 Material Type = Subgrade Selected Material (Austroads 2017)
 ID = subsltCB10 (Select fill, CBR = 10% & Ev top layer calculated by CIRCLY)
 Subgrade:
 Thickness = 0
 Run Analysis
CDF top of lime

Reliability = 95% stabilised subgrade CDF top of Subgrade

Pavement Design Supplement - QLD TMR June 2021 &
Guideline: Structural Design Procedure for Lime Stabilised
Subgrade - QLD TMR June 2021
Subgrade stabilisation enhances soil strength and stiffness properties by adding a

hydraulic binder such as lime (substances which harden to water-resistant building
material following the addition of water)
Refinement of mix design methodology and improvements to construction based on
TMRs’ field research: Technical Specification: MRTS07A Insitu stabilised subgrades
using quicklime or hydrated lime
“current Austroads design methodology for lime stabilised subgrades considerably
underestimates structural strength and benefit provided to the pavement systems”
TMR Pavement Design Supplement now aligned with latest version of ‘TMR
Guideline: Structural Design Procedure for Lime Stabilised Subgrade’ which
1) increases design modulus &
2) removes sublayering requirement of lime stabilised subgrade materials
Design Modulus Poisson's Ratio Degree of anisotropy Sublayering
210 MPa 0.45 2 NOT sublayered

Exercise: Cement - Stabilised Base Design
Heavily Bound Cemented (HBC)
Cemented base
Granular
base
Granular
subbase
Subgrade Subgrade
Rehabilitation of an unbound granular pavement with treating
by cementitious stabilisation of existing granular material:
Appendix K – Cement-stabilised Base Design Example

‘Pavement with sprayed bituminous seal-surfaced on 450 mm of unbound granular
material over a subgrade with a design CBR 7% has rutting primarily caused by the
non-standard granular base’
A treatment option identified for evaluation was to:
• cementitious stabilisation of existing granular material to depth of 350 mm by
aaaddition of 5% cementitious binder to produce a Heavily Cemented Base (HBC)
• sprayed bituminous seal surfacing
Cemented base design E = 5000 MPa, flexural strength of 1.4 MPa and in-service
fatigue constant (K) = 235 Note: k in CIRCLY = 0.000235 (unitless so k = K/106)
(Table 6.9: Presumptive fatigue constants AGPT02-17)
Note post-cracking life of cemented base not considered as the cement material
base will be surfaced with a sprayed seal
Cemented base E = 5000 MPa & t = 350 mm
Thickness
Sprayed Seal (mm)
350
Cemented Base Top granular sub-layer EV
(E = 5000 MPa)
EV top layer is minimum of 150 MPa (Table 6.4), or
Equation 41 (Section 8.2.3):
Granular 100
subbase EV subgrade×2(top granular thickness/125) = 70×2(100/125) = 122 MPa
Subgrade
CBR=7% 0 70 MPa (CBR 7%)
Trial Pavement
*CIRCLY would reduce to 122 MPa via Eq.41 any Granular input E > 122 MPa
AGPT02-17
Sprayed Seal Thickness Modulus Ev
350 mm 5000 MPa Cement5000 AGPT02-17*
Cemented base
Granular 100 mm 122 MPa Gran_122*

subbase
0 mm 70 MPa Sub_CBR7*
Subgrade CBR 7%
Semi-infinite

 Job Name: Cement-stabilised Base Design

 State: Example
 ID: _Example

 Create a new Cement Stabilised material:

 Material Type = Cement Stabilised select
 ID = Cement5000 AGPT02-17
 Title = Cemented E=5000 MPa, FS=1.4 MPa, K=235
Table 6.9: Presumptive fatigue constants
Properties
 Modulus = 5000.0
*CIRCLY format input
 Performance Exponent (k) = 0.000235
Note post-cracking phase is not analysed as when the cemented base

fatigue cracks it will readily propagate through the sprayed seal surface

 ID = Gran_122
 Title = Granular, E=122 MPa
 Material Type = Subgrade (Austroads 2017)

 ID = Sub_CBR7
 Title = Subgrade, CBR7, Aniso

 ID = Cement-Stab Example
 Title = Cement-Stab Example
 Cement Stabilised :
 Material Type = Cement Stabilised  select in Material Type combo box
 ID = Cement5000 AGPT02-17
 Thickness = 350 mm (E = 5000 MPa, v=0.2)
 ID = Gran_122 (therefore max. E = 122 MPa at base top)
 Subgrade:
 Thickness = 0
 Run Analysis
CDF bottom of cemented material

Reliability = 95%
CDF top of Subgrade
SADT Critical strains:

• top of subgrade: maximum vertical compressive strain is 155 με
• bottom of cemented material: maximum horizontal tensile strain of 62.6 με
SAST Critical strain:

• bottom of cemented material: maximum horizontal tensile strain of 45.3 με
Unitless strains
CDF bottom Cemented material

‘As CDF << 1 consideration could be
given to assessing the suitability of a
treatment with a slightly reduced
cemented base thickness’
CDF top of Subgrade

Exercise: Modified Granular Base* Design
*Lightly Bound Cemented (LBC)
Modified Granular
Base
Unbound Granular
Base
Unbound Granular
Subbase
Subgrade Subgrade
Rehabilitation by modifying the top 150 mm granular base with

addition of 1% cementitious material to increase the rut-resistance
Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design - AGPT05-19
Exercise: Modified Granular Base Design
Sprayed seal unbound granular pavement with rutting primarily occurring in the
non-standard granular base - Treatment option evaluated is modify the top 150 mm
granular base by addition 1% cementitious material to increase rut-resistance of
base (previously Cement Modified Base (CMB) now ‘Lightly Bound Cemented’ LBC)
Repeated load triaxial testing showed increased max possible E 250 MPa to 700 MPa
with significant improvement in permanent deformation characteristics of the base
Testing of the treated material gave a UCS = 0.9 MPa
(as < 1 MPa categorised as a modified material - AGPT04D-19)
Note modified materials are not susceptible to fatigue cracking
Evolving design rules – see:
Austroads AP-R640-20 (Nov 2020) & Qld Pavement Design Supplement – June 2021
& ‘LBC Bonus Exercise from Pavement Design Supplement – TMR QLD June 2021’
Total thickness unbound granular layers into five sublayers -

Thickness
Modified Granular Base behaves as unbound granular material
Sprayed Seal (mm)
Top granular sub-layer EV
Modified Granular
EV top layer is minimum of 700 MPa (Lab. RLT), or
Base
150 Equation 41 (Section 8.2.3)
Total thickness of granular materials*
Unbound Granular (150 + 250) = 400
Subbase 250
EV subgrade×2(total granular thickness/125) = 50×2(400/125) = 459.5 MPa
Subgrade
CBR=5% 0 50 MPa (CBR 5%)
Trial Pavement
EV top layer minimum = 495.5 MPa
*CIRCLY does not automatically combine granular layers AGPT02-17

 Job Name: Modified Granular Base Design

 State: Example
 ID: _Example

 ID = Modified-Granular Ex
 Title = Modified Granular Base Design Example
 ID = Gran_500 (Note: CIRCLY automatically will use Ev = 459.5 MPa Eq.41)
 Subgrade:
 Thickness = 0
 Run Analysis
Calculated
by CIRCLY
automatically
CDF Top of Subgrade < 1: Pavement OK

Reliability = 95%
Exercise: Asphalt Inlay Design Example
Asphalt Inlay
Cracked Asphalt
Cracked Asphalt
Cracked Cemented Cracked Cemented

Base Base
Subgrade Subgrade
Rehabilitation Treatment: mill 80 mm from existing cracked asphalt surface

and replace with 80 mm size 14 mm asphalt inlay in 2 x 40 mm layers
Appendix J: Asphalt Inlay Design Example*
* See for full details of the design and analysis
Exercise: Asphalt Inlay Design
Pavement section has cracked 240 mm asphalt and cracked 150 mm cemented
material subbase (CMS) pavement located where WMAPT = 32 °C
Treatment option is to mill 80 mm thickness of existing cracked asphalt and replace
with 80 mm asphalt inlay in 2 x 40 mm layers
The design period = 10 years as existing asphalt is cracked and the treatment
option is a thin asphalt resurfacing – it is anticipated cracking from the existing
asphalt will propagate through the treatment within 10 years so design fatigue life
of > 10 years is inappropriate and not a cost-effective strategy
FWD testing conducted in the outer wheel path at 10 m intervals with existing
pavement and subgrade moduli at the time of deflection testing have been
estimated using back-calculation
NDT = 107 cumulative HVAG and DESA = 0.7 x 107 ESA (10 year design period)
TLD is Appendix G (AGPT02-17) = ID: _Example (ESA/HVAG = 0.7)
Project Reliability = 95% Design traffic speed = 60 km/h
AGPT05-19
Back-calculate the layer moduli from measured deflection bowls

Pavement & subgrade E’s estimated by back-calculation of measured deflections
The back-calculation undertaken for layer:
• 240 mm asphalt:
constrained with min & max moduli of 500 MPa & 10000 MPa respectively
• 150 mm cemented material:
• top 300 mm of subgrade:
Asphalt Layer modulus (MPa)
State temp. Asphalt CMS Subgrade Subgrade Subgrade
(*C) (top 300 mm) (300-800 mm) (> 800 mm)
During deflection 42 1110 270 67 137 211
measurements
At in-service 32 1830 270 67 137 211
temp. WMAPT
Table J 1: Summary of representative back-calculated moduli AGPT05-19

Elastic parameters for subgrade based on:

• Representative back-calculated Ev top 300 mm of subgrade = 67 MPa (Table J 1) –
anote may be overestimate as obtained at a dry time of year?
• Dynamic cone penetrometer testing of the subgrade resulted in estimated in situ
CBR at three sites of 7%, 10% and 13% - overestimate as dry time of year?
• Laboratory CBR testing undertaken on a sample of subgrade at the site where the
alowest field CBR was measured The laboratory-soaked CBR value = 5%
aSubgrade design CBR = 5% (Ev = 50 MPa) - selected based on the above.
Elastic parameters for 150 mm of CMS post-cracking design modulus based on:
• Representative E = 270 MPa back-calculated from the FWD deflections (Table J 1)

• The E = 500 MPa for presumptive cracked cemented materials in AGPT02-17
Back-calculated modulus < than presumptive value so design Ev = 270 MPa
AGPT05-19
Asphalt inlay
Measured indirect tensile modulus size 14 mm dense-graded asphalt (Class 320

binder) in close proximity to the project was 4130 MPa at:
• in-service air voids of 5%
• a measurement temperature of 25 °C
• a rise time of 40 milliseconds
adjustments to measured modulus made using Section 6.5.5 procedure (AGPT02-17)

• the modulus x 0.57 to adjust to a temperature of 32 °C
• the modulus x 0.85 to adjust to the in-service traffic loading rate (60 km/h)
Resulting design E = 2000 MPa adopted for the size 14 mm dense-graded asphalt
AGPT05-19
Existing cracked asphalt

Temperature-adjusted back-calculated E = 1830 MPa < design E = 2200 MPa
new size 20 mm asphalt with WMAPT = 32°C & heavy vehicle design speed
Back-calc. E = 1830 MPa > presumptive cracked asphalt E = 765 MPa (WMAPT 32°C)
The design E calculated as follows:
Modulus reduction factor

Figure 10.2
1. Fatigue-cracked asphalt: allow for future
damage to asphalt during design period:
Traffic Ratio (TR) = Design traffic divided by
Past traffic = 7 x 106 ESA / 3.5 x 106 ESA = 2
so E reduction factor = 0.5 (Figure 10.2)
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
2. E = 1830 x 0.5 (reduction factor) = 915 MPa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Design traffic / Past traffic
3. Design E of existing cracked asphalt = 915 MPa

(as maximum value of Step 2 & presumptive cracked asphalt)
AGPT05-19
Table J 2: Summary of design moduli

Material type Thickness Elastic modulus (MPa) Poisson's ratio f
(mm) EV EH VV VH value
Asphalt Inlay (Vb = 10.5%) 80 2000 2000 0.40 0.40
Existing asphalt base* 160 915 915 0.40 0.40
Existing cemented material 150 270 135 0.35 0.35 200
Subgrade Semi-infinite 50 25 0.45 0.45 34.5
* Note after milling 80 mm of cracked asphalt surface
AGPT05-19
 Job Name: Asphalt Inlay Design

 State: Example
 ID: _Example

 Create a new Cement Stabilised (post-cracking) material:
 ID = Cement270A
 Title = Cemented Granular- E=270 MPa, anisotropic, cracked
Properties
 Modulus Ev = 270.0
 Create new Asphalt elastic material:

 ID = AC2000
 Title = Size 14 Binder C320 60km/h E = 2000 MPa Vb=10.5%
k* CIRCLY Calculated

 Create new Asphalt Cracked … elastic material:

 Material Type = Asphalt (Cracked/Low Modulus, no Fatigue properties) 
 ID = AC915 Cracked
 Title = Asphalt Cracked E = 915 MPa
 Properties: E = 915 MPa, ν = 0.4 (Note Isotropic & no Fatigue Properties!)


 ID = Asphalt Inlay Design
 Title = Asphalt Inlay Design
 Asphalt Inlay:
 Material Type = Asphalt  select in Material Type combo box
 ID = AC2000
 Existing Cracked Asphalt Base:
 Material Type = Asphalt (Cracked/Low Modulus, no Fatigue properties) 
 ID = AC915 Cracked
 Thickness = 160 mm (note after milling 80 mm of cracked asphalt off)
 Existing Cracked Cemented Material:
 Material Type= Cement Stabilised (post-cracking) 
 ID = Cement270A

 Subgrade:
 Thickness = 0
 Run Analysis
No Damage for Cracked Asphalt
CDF Asphalt Inlay trial treatment due to design traffic

= sum of damage resulting from each axle group
= 0.385
CDF ≤ 1 so OK
Pavement Structural Condition Evaluation -
Remaining Life Assessment
Theoretical:
simplified relative damage (CDF, etc) & ignores future traffic growth, etc
In situ pavement:
complex & evaluate via geotechnical investigation:
visual inspection, boreholes, GPR and etc; also surface deflections
(Falling Weight Deflectometer)
See:
Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology Part 5: Pavement Evaluation and
Treatment Design (AGPT05-19)
Pavement Rehabilitation Manual, Transport and Main Roads, February 2020
Overview of Pavement Design Systems
Section 2.3.3 AGPT02-17
It should be noted that all the performance relationships presented in

AGPT02-17 have been developed on the basis of the damage caused
by normal road traffic loadings on road pavements
If the analysis models in AGPT02-17 are used to analyse other

loading spectra (e.g. container carriers) then the performance
relationships may not be applicable
Wheel Loading Comparison*
Not to Scale!
100 Tonnes
100 Tonnes
30 Tonnes
30 Tonnes
3 Tonnes
ROAD PAVEMENTS: AIRCRAFT / HAUL TRUCKS

AUSTROADS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL
*Note Different Performance Criteria used for Each Load Range

Overview of Airport and Heavy Duty
Applications: Higher Wheel Loads
Boeing 747- 400
• Max takeoff weight: 413 tonnes
• wheel load B747 = 24.5 t vs SADT = 2 t (1/12th)

Vehicle Wander
0.0005
0.0004
Taxiway
0.0003 (SD = 800 mm)
0.0002
Runway
(SD = 1600 mm)
0.0001
0
-4000 -3000 -2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
X (mm) Centreline
Normal Distributions defined by a SD: Standard Deviation

Generally pavement thickness decreases with increasing SD
Effect of Wander -
shallow pavement (500 mm)
1.0
0.8
No wander
Damage
0.6
Taxiway
0.4
Runway
0.2
0.0
-4000 -2000 0 2000 4000
X (mm)
Effect of Wander -
deep pavement (1500 mm)
1.0
No wander
0.8
Damage
Taxiway
0.6
Runway
0.4
0.2
0.0
-4000 -2000 0 2000 4000
X (mm)
Thicker less effect

Effect of wander on thickness
Sub-base thickness
Wander: Runway Taxiway Docking bay
(SD = 1600 mm) (SD = 800 mm) (SD = 200 mm)
Thickness: 590 mm 630 mm 700 mm

Docking bay
Taxiway
Runway
Generally pavement
thickness decreases
with increasing SD
SD (mm)
APSDS:
Airport Pavement Structural Design System
Sample Cumulative Damage Plot
Spread is due to wander
L
C
Sample Cumulative Damage Plot
L
C
Vertical strain contour plot B747- 400
L
C
Carpet Plot
APSDS 5.0 Calibration (2010)
 Wardle and Rodway (2010). Advanced Design of Flexible

Aircraft Pavements. 24th ARRB Conference, Melbourne.
 Download from: https://pavement-science.com.au/apsdspap
 Performance parameters depend on number of wheels on gear

APSDS 5 vs FAARFIELD 2.0.0.e
A380-800 comparison
2250
A380-800
2000
100,000 departures
1750
Total Thickness (mm)
APSDS 5.0
1500
FAARFIELD 1.42
FAARFIELD 2.0.0.e
1250
1000
750
500
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
CBR Subgrade
APSDS 5 vs FAARFIELD
Comparison of Range of Aircraft
APSDS 5.0 vs FAARFIELD

(CBR5,6,8,10,12 & 15)
1750
1500
B737-800
FARRFIELD Total Thickness (mm)
B777-300ER
1250
B747-400
A330-300
1000
A380
750
500
250
0
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500
APSDS 5.0 Total Thickness (mm)
5th runway design at
Amsterdam Airport Schiphol -
on very weak soils & 4.5 m
below sea level
Design & Construction of Fifth Runway

at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol
A.R. Nataraj & J.F.A. Koning Netherlands
Airport Consultants B.V., The Hague, The
Netherlands M.J. Voorwinde Amsterdam
Pavement construction 5th Runway Airport Schiphol, The Netherlands
APSDS also used at

Western Sydney Airport
Container Terminal Projects
Comprehensive range of vehicle types
Forklift, Mast Lift Tractor-Trailers, Trucks
Straddle Carriers
Reach Stackers Rubber Tyred Gantry

Lateral Vehicle Wander
 A critical design parameter

 A normal distribution is assumed
 Standard Deviation (SD) of wander
adistribution can vary with vehicle type
Effect of Wander on Subbase thickness
20 t Payload & Hyster
300k Movements H40.00E-
quay side & side aisles 16CH
b/n container blocks
9% thinner
11% thinner
main circulation tracks & road

truck storage & loading areas
SD
Axle Load vs Container Mass
Container Weight (tonnes)

Unladen
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
90
80
y = 1.5066x + 31.78
70
Front axle
Axle Load (tonnes)
60
50
40
30
Rear axle
20
10
y = -0.47x + 22.15
0
Kalmar Forklift DCD370-12

HIPAVE: Axle Load vs Container Mass
C o n ta in e r W e ig h t (to n n e s )
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
90
80
y = 1 .5 0 6 6 x + 3 1 .7 8
70
F ro n t a x le
Axle Load (tonnes)

60
50
40
30
R e a r a x le
20
10
y = -0 .4 7 x + 2 2 .1 5
0
HIPAVE:
Sample Damage Factor vs Container Mass
HIPAVE:
Sample Damage Factor vs Distance
L
C
Important Warning-
Heavy Duty Pavements
• Performance data developed for highway pavements
a(e.g. Austroads) is not generally appropriate for
aheavy loadings such as airports & container terminals
• Use of such models can lead to grossly under-designed
apavements that fail prematurely
Heavy Duty Industrial
Pavement Design Guide
Collaborative effort:
 Leigh Wardle - Mincad Systems
 Ian Rickards - Pioneer Road Services
Pty Ltd (Melbourne, Australia)
 John Lancaster – VicRoads
(Melbourne, Australia)
 Dr. Susan Tighe
(Dept. Civil Engineering, University of
Waterloo, Canada).
Haul Road Design
$7 million+
Liebherr T 282 C
Used at Peak Downs open cut
coking coal mine Qld, etc
Haul Road Design Liebherr T282
Figure 1.2 Trend in truck payload capacity for selected rear dump
truck models from 1920s onwards
Mining Haul Roads – Theory & Practice Thompson et. al. 1st Ed. 2018
Size is about efficiency - bigger payloads mean

fewer trips up & down decline, moving more
material in less time & theoretically lower costs
Haul Road Design
Total Weight (loaded): (237 + 363) tonnes = 600 tonnes on 6 wheels
100t Load per wheel
Liebherr T 282 C
Liebherr T 282 C on
semi for transport to
Haul Road Design Peak Downs open cut
coking coal mine Qld
Total Weight (loaded): (237 + 363) tonnes = 600 tonnes on 6 wheels
100t Load per wheel
Liebherr T 282 C
Antonov An-225 (Mriya = Dream) 1988
Heaviest aircraft until destroyed
Antonov is producing a second An-225 Mriya
• Empty weight: 285 tonnes (no fuel)

• Payload: 190 tonnes
• Max takeoff weight: 640 tonnes
• wheel load = 22 tonnes vs
aT 282 C Haul Truck = 100 tonnes Rebuild cost USD$3 billion
Haul Road Design
Design Method:
 Austroads Guide not valid – loads are too large
 State of the art: “South African” design method -
Thompson and Visser
 'Mining Haul Roads - Theory and Practice’
Thompson, Peroni, Visser 1st Edition, 2018
Taylor & Francis (CRCPress)
 Google “Haul circly” for more info

 CIRCLY 7.0 automates this approach
Haul Road
Design
Liebherr T282
59/80R63 tyre $75,000+ & weighs > 5 t
The adjacent rear wheels combine to give the critical design loading -
although each wheel of the haul truck carries about the same load
Critical design loading: adjacent rear wheels
Rear 2 Wheels
modelled
W
CIRCLY Global Coordinate System
Travel
Direction
Centreline of Vehicle
CDF
X X
Wheels
on axle
Z
Z axis is vertically downwards with

Z = 0 on the pavement surface (+ve down)
W
CIRCLY
Coordinates for Results
Plan View
Wearing Course
Base Blasted
waste rock
 Assuming: Compacted
 inner rear wheel is at (x,y) = (0,0) Subgrade / in-situ
 outer rear wheel is at (x,y) = (W,0) In-situ
 X - values defined by: 0 ½W
 xmin = 0 (under inner wheel centre-line – upper pavement impact)
 xmax = 0.5 * W (midway b/n dual wheels – lower pavement impact)
 Z - values defined by surface and all interfaces (Above/Below)
Compressive vertical strain at top in situ subgrade (& compacted subgrade)

Special Input: Vertical Strain Criterion
Usually εv compressive upper limit 2000με = 0.002 (unitless strain) –

Thompson, et al (2018)
 If > values of maximum vertical strain:

 causes rutting & general loss of shape of the road surface, &
 ride quality deteriorates reducing serviceability with often increasing
road rolling resistance directly impacting haulage efficiency
Haul Road Design
with CIRCLY 7.0
Typical haul road design considerations for a dual-carriage road (Caterpillar)

Assumed Material Properties
Material Thickness Modulus Poisson’s

(MPa) Ratio
Wearing 150 350 0.35
Course
Basecourse 700 3000 0.35
Subgrade Semi-infinite 50 0.35
Isotropic values used due to difficulty in

obtaining haul road input parameters
selected blasted
(hard) waste rock
CIRCLY 7.0 User Interface:
Haul Road Design Toolbar
Select Haul Road Design Method
Click to select
Haul Road Design
There are 3 icons to setup Haul Road Designs:

CIRCLY 7.0 User Interface:
Haul Road Design Toolbar
 Create a CIRCLY job by selecting icons in any order
* *
*Layers & Materials databases used by all Design Methods

To Start a new Haul Road Design job
To start a New Job – select (click ‘New’ button)
Enter job name
The Navigator Panel Select Haul Road Design Method

To Open an existing Haul Road Design job
To open existing job – click Open
List of existing jobs

Haul Truck database
Choose the Manufacturer in the combo box

Choose the Design Truck by clicking on a row
Tyre
W
width
Haul Truck database
Click New to add a new Model

Click Duplicate to clone a Model
Haul Truck database
Loading Inputs
Gross Vehicle Mass
Note models can have different values (GVM, etc) Generally 600 to 900 kPa tyre pressure
depending on supplied options: e.g. Michelin 59/80R63 XDR4 Extra Load
check specifications used/proposed at actual site Tyre Load Tonnes: 109 112 115
Tyre Press. MPa: 0.70 0.725 0.75 (cold)
Payload overload also increases inflation
(see tyre manufacturer’s data books)
Haul Truck – Loading
How tyre footprint loading area calculated
Area = Force / Stress CIRCLY Inputs
π x Radius2 = ((GVM x Rear axle split %) / 4 (wheels) x 9.81) / Tyre Pressure

3.14 x Radius2 = ((100.69 x 0.65)/4 x 9.81) / 0.8 = 200.64 kN = 200640 N
Radius = sqrt (200640 / 3.14) = 252.7 mm
CIRCLY calculated
Materials database
Isotropic values used due to difficulty in

obtaining haul road input parameters
Layers Database
iso 350MPa 150mm
iso 3000MPa 700mm
iso 50MPa
Haul Road Design Damage Factor (CDF)
Damage Factor: CDF = Ezz max / Vertical Strain Criterion
Ezz max is the maximum vertical strain for any given horizon
Rutting - maintenance (grading) / life indicator

Haul Road Design Process
Results
Highest value in Blue

and Red if CDF > 1.0
Ezz Vertical Strain Criterion Subgrade CDF
Default = 0.002 (2000 μϵ microstrain)
How to use Automatic Thickness Design
2 Click on row to highlight layer

1 Tick box that you want to design (No. 2)
3 Click ‘Analyse’ icon
Optimum value
Graphs
Choose top of Subgrade
‘iso, E=50MPa (Top)’ in Layer combo box
L
C
435.2 mm
0 mm
Refinement of Vertical Strain Criterion
life < 6 months
life < 5 years
life > 5 years
Thompson (2015)
Notes: Based on acceptable structural performance of road and maximum deflection underfully-laden rear dual, where Performance
Index(PI) varies from:
.Adequate but fairly maintenance intensive,
.Good with normal maintenance interventions,
.Outstanding with low maintenance requirements.
For Tannant & Regensburg models, design life based on 220 tonne payload truck load cycles determined using two axles & Performance
Index of 2 used.
Refinement of Vertical Strain Criterion
Range of Maximum Recommended

Vertical Elastic Strains εv μϵ (microstrain)
Haul Road Typical Description Traffic Volumes Traffic Volumes
Category >100kt/day * <100kt/day
Category I Permanent high volume main hauling
roads and ramps, in and ex-pit. 900 1500
Operating life > 5 years
Semi-permanent high volume roads in-
Category II and ex-pit, dump access roads. 1500 2000
Operating life < 5 years
Short-term roads, goodbye ramps and
Category III dump finger roads. 2000 2500
Operating life < 6 months
Pavement layer limiting vertical compressive strain criteria: * kt = kiloton

tailored to traffic volume, type & life of mine road (ramp, pit or main haul)
(e.g. Category II road carrying 50 kt/day has a Limiting Strain value = 2000 μϵ)
Lower critical εv with > traffic wheel loads, volumes (kt/day) & road operating life
Typical subgrade εv values from various sources: Thompson, et al (2018)
Vertical Strain Criterion Comparison
Note change in the thickness of Layer 2 in each case:
Cat I, II & III: Traffic Volumes < 100kt/day Thick. 480 to 370 to 290 mm
Permanent roads
life > 5 years

Cat. I
Permanent
Semi-permanent roads
life < 5 years

Cat. II
Semi-
Permanent
Short-term roads
life < 6 mnths

Cat. III
Short Term
Subgrade CDF = 1
Vertical Strain Criterion Comparison
Automatic
Note Layer 2 thickness for each case: Thickness
Design
Cat I, II & III with Traffic Volumes < 100kt/day & > 100kt/day
ε
(Cat. Subgrade Vertical Strains v - Fig. 3.22 Thompson, et al 2018)
Thickness of Layer 2 (mm)
life > 5 years life < 5 years life < 6 mnths

Permanent Semi-Permanent Short Term
View Result Files
Select ‘Print’
Job Summary File is opened
CIRCLY calculated Note slider to view file

View Result Files
Vertical Strain Ezz = 0.0015 (1500με)
Subgrade
Damage Factor: CDF = E / Vertical Strain Criterion = 1500 / 1500 = 1.0

Graph: CDF at Subgrade
Damage Factor:
CDF = Ezz / Vertical Strain Criterion
= 1500 / 1500 = 1.0
Vertical Strain
Ezz = 0.0015 (1500με)
Graph: Surface UZ
Select ‘Print’
Click .CLO File (printable' results)

(mm)
Surface deflections (UZ displacements at Z = 0) used to assess

potential impact on rolling resistance (high: corrugations & rutting)
5.2 mm
Cost Optimization
Cost Calculation
+
=
A Powerful Tool for
Pavement Cost Optimization
Total Cost $
Indicative Pavement Material Rates per Cubic Metre (2015*)
All rates include supply, spread, trim and compaction
Material Type CBR Modulus (MPa) Rate ($10/m3)
2.1 80 350 160
2.2 60 290 135
2.3 45 240 125
2.4 35 206 120
2.5 15 120 110
2% Cement Modified 2.1 500 195
2% Cement Modified 2.1 400 170
Blast Rock 3000 140 plus $10/m2
for geo-fabric
*A review on Australian mine haul road design procedures - A. Strack USQ 2015

Unit Costs
Geosynthetics, etc
 Automatically loop through one or two thickness ranges
Loop
Thickness t iso 350MPa 150mm
Auto Design
iso 3000MPa 750mm
Thickness
iso 50MPa
Graph: Total Cost vs Layer Thickness
Select “Total Cost”
Automatically generated plot:

Total Cost vs Layer 2 Thickness
Minimum Total $ Cost

Rio Tinto trialling Scania’s 40 tonne
payload autonomous trucks
About 5.5 tonnes / wheel
Potential advantages of smaller trucks :
Help mine ore more selectively & lower overall
mining costs
Improve resource recovery by 3%
Reduces strip ration & mine footprint by 10% (with
narrower & less steep haul roads, steeper pit walls,
reduced vegetation disturbance so less waste rock)
Deliver big capital expenditure savings
Allows for smaller haul roads which makes it easier
to mine around Indigenous heritage sites
Lowers greenhouse gas emissions
Expected to make it easier in terms of recharging &
replacing batteries for fleet electrification
Scania XT 8×4 autonomous tipper truck

Note not suitable for all mines
Haul Road Design: Dr Roger Thompson
‘Fundamentals of Mine Haul Road Design’ (2015)

Dr Roger Thompson (Western Australia School of Mines)
Google: “Fundamentals Thompson September 2015”
'Mining Haul Roads - Theory and Practice’

Thompson, Peroni, Visser
1st Edition, 2018
Taylor & Francis (CRCPress)
Exercise 7:
Trial Pavement: Asphalt - Cemented - Granular
mm MPa
Surfacing 14H-80* Asphalt 40 3600
Intermediate 20SS-80* Asphalt 120 5000
Base 20SF-80* Asphalt 75 3800
Cem500A Cement Treated 180 500 (post-cracked)
Gran_150 Granular 150 150

Select Fill
(CBR 6%) SF-CBR6* (Select Subgrade) 200 60
(CBR 2%) Sub_CBR2 Subgrade 0.0 20
*4 New Materials to add

Exercise 7:
 Traffic Load Distribution

 State: Vic
 ID: kyn (kyn - Calder Freeway - Macedon Ranges – S)
 Traffic (NDT): 1.0E+8 (HVAG)

Asphalt Properties
Can use VB (%) with E in CIRCLY

built-in ‘k’ calculator
K*

values by 106 for
CIRCLY asphalt
fatigue constant ‘k’
i.e. 3650*= 3650/106 *

k = 0.00365
Exercise 7:
Create new material properties
 Create 3 new Asphalt elastic materials:

 ID = 14H-80
k* CIRCLY Calculated
 Title = 14H 80km/h Vb=10.5%
 ID = 20SF-80
 Title = 20SF 80km/h Vb=12.8%
 ID = 20SS-80
 Title = 20SS 80km/h Vb=10.4%
Exercise 7:
Post-cracking phase of cemented material
Asphalt(s) thickness on cemented material is 235 mm >= 175 mm*

post-cracking phase of cemented material life may be considered:
Sect. 8.2.6: AGPT02-19
(*reduces risk of reflective cracking) 235 mm
Post-cracking cemented material phase:

CIRCLY Material Type Cement Stabilised (post-cracking): Cem500A
Note: no need to add as already in CIRCLY database
Anisotropic
(degree of anisotropy = 2)
𝑉= 500 MPa 𝑉 = 𝐻 = 0.35
No sublayering
Exercise 7:
Create new material properties
 Create new subgrade elastic material: Select via combo box
 Material Type = Subgrade (Selected Material) (Austroads 2017)

ID = SF-CBR6
Title = Select fill, CBR=6
Elastic properties: Ev = 60 MPa, Poisson’s Ratio = 0.45
Exercise 7: Create the Layered System
(7 layers using the 4 new and 3 existing materials):
New Layered System, ID = Exercise 7, Title = Asphalt - Cracked Cement treated - Granular
Add 1st layer

Asphalt: Material Type = Asphalt  select in Material Properties combo box
Select ID = 14H-80 and add Thickness = 40 mm

Create the Layered System
(top down)
Create 1st Layer 14H-80 if not done yet
 Asphalt: Material Type = Asphalt 

 ID = 14H-80, Thickness = 40 mm

 ID = 20SS-80, Thickness = 120 mm
 = select via Material Type combo box
 ID = 20SF-80, Thickness = 75 mm
 Cement Treated (post-cracking): Material Type = Cement Stabilised (post-cracking) 

 ID = Cem500A, Thickness = 180 mm
 Granular: Material Type = Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering) 

 ID = Gran_150, Thickness = 150 mm
 Select Fill: Material Type = Subgrade (Selected Material) (Austroads 2017) 

 ID = SF-CBR6, Thickness = 200 mm
 Subgrade: Material Type = Subgrade (Austroads 2017) 

 ID = Sub_CBR2, Thickness = 0
Exercise 7:
Final Layered System
Exercise 7: Results
Excludes construction tolerance of 10 mm

as layer controls the design life No CDF for 14H-80 surface asphalt
(compressive strains only)
Reliability = 97.5% CDF = 0.926

Design Traffic NDT = 1.0 x 108 HVAG (Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups)
2 Click on row to highlight layer that you want to design

Optimum thickness 70.94 mm (c.f. 75mm)
CDF
How to use Automatic Thickness Design:
Case 2: Change of Design Traffic NDT to 1.5E+8
3 Analyse
2 Tick Design thickness.. & Layer 3
Thickness increases to 90.18 mm

CDF
Change Design Traffic NDT to 1.5E+8 HVAG (Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups)
How to Create a Layered System via Duplicate
(instead of building the system from scratch)
Duplicate Aust2017-3P and edit to create a new Layered System
1 Select Aust17-3P 2 Click Duplicate button
3
ID = Exercise 7A &
Title = Asphalt - Cracked Cement treated - Granular
4 Click OK to save
1 Select AC14 to open Asphalt Material Properties
3 Click OK to update
2 Select 14H-80 to replace AC14 Asphalt in the Layered System

Create the Layered System: add a layer
2 Select Asphalt Material Properties
1 Click New to add a layer
3 Select 20SF-80 to insert into the Layered System

4 Click OK
Click to sort column
(4)
(5)
(7)
(6)
Edit (type in 3 over 6) so 20SF-80 becomes Layer No. 3 in the pavement

& update the remaining layer numbers to correct the order:
layers (4 for 3); (5 for 4); (7 for 5) & (6 for 7)
Enter the correct

Thickness for each layer
Correct order for the Layered System

Pre-Cracking Phase in Cemented Materials: Change
Cem500A to Cement Stabilised Cement3000
1 Select Layers & Exercise 7A
3 Select Cement Stabilised

5
4 Select Cement3000
2 Select Layer 4: Cem500A
Cem500A replaced with Cement3000

Downloads:
https://pavement-science.com.au/downloads




Contact us by email: info@pavement-science.com.au
Licence Options
 Standard Annual Licence (Single User)

 USB Hardware Lock (Dongle) that you can
move from PC to PC as required
 Floating Annual Licence (Multiple Users)
 any number of users
share a pool of
Floating Licences
 more flexible - Hardware Lock not required

 special software not needed on
User’s PCs or Servers
 can be accessed anytime worldwide
Licence Options
CIRCLY Floating Licence
CIRCLY
License
Server
Licence Options
Evaluation Mode (= Demo Mode)
 CIRCLY/APSDS/HIPAVE operates in Evaluation Mode unless

you have an Annual Licence (typically using a Hardware Lock)
 Evaluation Mode has the following restriction:
You must use the Standard Material Properties provided

with the Example Jobs or Workshop Exercises
CIRCLY 7.0 Evaluation Mode restriction:
(Limited to the Standard Material Properties used in the
Example Jobs and Workshop exercises)
Standard Materials Properties Description
Asphalt
AC14 Size 14 - WMAPT 28⁰ C - 60 km/h
AC20 Size 20 - WMAPT 28⁰ C - 60 km/h
Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering)

Gran_150 Granular. E=150 MPa
Cement Stabilised
Cement3000 Cemented. E=3000 MPa
Cement Stabilised (post-cracking)

Cem500A Cemented Granular-E=500 MPa anisotropic, cracked
Subgrade (Austroads 2017)

Sub_CBR2.5 Subgrade. CBR=2.5,Anisotropic
Sub_CBR3 Subgrade. CBR=3,Anisotropic
Sub_CBR5 Subgrade. CBR=5,Anisotropic
Haul Roads (isotropic)

iso 50 iso. E=50 MPa
CIRCLY 7.0 Online Tutorials
https://pavement-science.com.au/softover/circly/circly-7-0-tutorials/
Bonus Exercises
Summary Only – see later slides for full details
Bonus Exercise 1:
App L.4: Asphalt over Lightly Bound Base pavement (ALBB)
Pavement Design Supplement - TMR QLD June 2021
Bonus Exercise 2:
Crumb Rubber Asphalt vs Binder Rich Structural Fatigue
Asphalt Type SF as base layer in thick heavy duty pavement
Bonus Exercise 3:
Specialised Vehicle - Six Axle Mobile Crane (AGPT02-17)
(uses General Analysis and General Design Methods)
Bonus Exercise 1:
mm MPa
Surfacing SMA14 E=1300* Asphalt 50 1300
Prime & Seal
Lightly Bound
LB E=600 Not Sub* Base ? 3800
Determine
Lightly Bound
LB E=240 Not Sub* Subbase 150 240

Bonus Exercise 2: CRA
Crumb Rubber Asphalt vs Binder Rich Structural Fatigue Asphalt
Type SF as base layer in thick heavy duty pavement
Sulaibiya in Kuwait has a mountain of 7M* tyres visible

from space *12.5% tyres discarded in Australia annually
Crumb Rubber Asphalt vs Binder Rich
Structural Fatigue Asphalt Type SF
as base layer in thick heavy duty pavement* Tyre Stewardship
Compare:
 Pavement Thickness: reduced with higher fatigue performance
CRA (Vb = 15.4%) vs Type SF (lower Vb = 12.8%)?
 Cost: is replacing base layer Type SF with CRA economical?
 CRA Modulus range: what affect?
 *Inputs from:
 POTENTIAL USE OF CRUMB RUBBER ASPHALT
FOR STRUCTURAL LAYERS: INITIAL PAVEMENT
DESIGN ANALYSIS D. Bodin et. al.
28th ARRB Int. Conference, Brisbane, Qld 2018*
*Note exact CRA properties unknown so includes an analytical study assuming
realistic parameters and varying design moduli for evaluation.
 Google “POTENTIAL USE OF CRUMB RUBBER ASPHALT FOR STRUCTURAL LAYERS:
INITIAL PAVEMENT DESIGN ANALYSIS”
Example of Specialised Vehicle Analysis
96 kms of road to relocate 3,500 tonne dragline from Goonyella Riverside Mine to
South Walker Creek Mine in Moranbah Qld. Used Self Propelled Modular Transport -
required design of road pavement & road crossings, including pavement overlays
Specialised Vehicle
SPMT (Self Propelled Modular Trailer)
Pharaoh Khufu's 4,600 year old 43 m & 20 tonne

‘solar boat’ moved to the Grand Egyptian Museum
“worlds largest & oldest artifact made of wood"
Bonus Exercise 3:
Specialised Vehicle - Six Axle Mobile Crane*
Use: General Design & General Analysis Methods

Calculate critical strains under Crane Axles (assume no interaction) &
determine # of Standard Axle repetitions that causes the same damage
Total damage in single crane pass = sum of damage due to each axle
Crane operated over 10 years with one crane load repetition per day
Each axle 2 x 20.5R25 tyres at 551kPa pressure and 2640mm c-to-c
*AGPT02-17 Appendix J:
Procedures for Evaluation of Pavement Damage Due to Specialised Vehicles
*See for full details of the design and analysis approach
Bonus Exercise 1:
The following design parameters are used:

• subgrade design CBR = 5%
• design traffic for 20 year design period = 2.0 x 107 HVAG or 1.4 x 107 ESA
• design traffic at opening = 1433 ESA/day
• traffic load distribution (TLD) = example distribution Appendix G of AGPT02-17
• Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature of 32°C
• design heavy vehicle operating speed of 80 km/h
• Project Reliability = 95%
Bonus Exercise 1:
mm MPa
Surfacing SMA14 E=1300* Asphalt 50 1300
Prime & Seal
LB E=600 Not Sub* Base ? 3800

Determine
LB E=240 Not Sub* Subbase 150 240

Bonus Exercise 1:
Step 2 – Asphalt characterisation SMA14 taken from Table 6.5.7(a)

Table 6.5.7(a) Presumptive values for elastic characterisation of asphalt mixes at 32ºC WMAPT
Asphalt Binder Volume of Asphalt Modulus at Heavy Vehicle
Mix Type Binder (%) Operating Speed (MPa)
Type 10 km/h 30 km/h 50 km/h 80 km/h
SMA14 A15E 13.0 1000* 1000* 1100 1300
(600) (900)
TMR CIRCLY 7.0 Materials Database
Step 3 – Subgrade characterisation

Design CBR = 5% EV = 50 MPa (10 × CBR) & EH = 25 MPa (0.5 x Ev) 𝑣V = 𝑣H = 0.45
Bonus Exercise 1:
For Steps 4 and 5 - the presumptive design EV of lightly bound granular materials is
the lowest value determined from the following tables: Table 6.8 (a) and Table 6.8 (b)
Table 6.8(a) – Maximum vertical design modulus of lightly bound granular
materials considering overlying bound and lightly bound materials
Total thickness of Modulus of the Overlying Bound or Lightly Bound Material (MPa)1
overlying bound and 600 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
lightly bound material Maximum Vertical Modulus of Lightly Bound Granular Material (MPa)2
(mm)
<40 600 600 600 600 600 600
75 600 600 600 590 580 570
100 600 600 570 550 530 520
125 590 570 530 510 490 470
150 570 540 500 470 440 430
175 550 510 460 430 430 430
200 520 480 430 430 430 430
225 500 460 430 430 430 430
250 470 430 430 430 430 430
275 450 430 430 430 430 430
<300 430 430 430 430 430 430
Adapted from Austroads AP-R640-20 Designing high performing flexible pavements
containing lightly bound cemented materials - Table 9.2
Note: 1. Equivalent modulus (Ee) determined using Equation 5 in AGPT02-17

2. These values apply to lightly bound base, subbase & improved layer material complying with MRTS10
For lightly bound material manufactured using Type 2.4, 2.5, 3.4 or 3.5 material, a max. Ev of 210 MPa
applies regardless of thickness and modulus of the overlaying bound materials
Bonus Exercise 1:
Table 6.8 (b) considering underlying support conditions (the E is limited to 4x the
design EV of the underlying support layer with a min. = 240 MPa and max. = 600 MPa)
Table 6.8(b) Max. design Ev of lightly bound granular materials
considering underlying support conditions
Vertical Design Modulus of Maximum Vertical Modulus of
Support Layer (MPa)1 Lightly Bound Material (MPa)
20 to 60 240
70 280
80 320
90 360
100 400
110 440
120 480
130 520
140 560
> 150 600
Adapted from Austroads AP-R640-20 Designing high performing flexible pavements
containing lightly bound cemented materials
Note: Min. support of 150 MPa applies to lightly bound base layers as detailed in Sect. 8.2.8
Bonus Exercise 1:
Step 4 – Subbase characterisation
Max. EV from Table 6.8(a) of the lightly bound subbase due to overlying bound &
lightly bound materials is between 430 MPa & 600 MPa (as overlying base thickness
is unknown at this stage, the actual max value cannot be determined until Step 8)
Max. EV from Table 6.8(b) of the lightly bound subbase due to underlying support
conditions = 240 MPa (using design E = 50 MPa for underlying support from Step 3)
Therefore:
EV subbase = 240 MPa (the minimum value from tables 6.8(a) and 6.8(b))
EH subbase = 120 MPa (0.5 x Ev subbase) &
𝑣V = 𝑣H = 0.35
TMR CIRCLY 7.0 Materials Database
No sublayering as is a lightly bound material
The EV of the lightly bound subbase satisfies the requirement in Section 8.2.8 that
the minimum support below lightly bound base = 150 MPa
Bonus Exercise 1:
Step 5 – Base characterisation
Max. EV from Table 6.8(a) of the lightly bound base due to the overlying SMA (50
mm thick and 1300 MPa from Step 2) = 600 MPa
From Table 6.8(b) the maximum vertical modulus of the lightly bound base due to
underlying support conditions is 600 MPa (using a design modulus = 240 MPa for
the underlying support as determined in Step 4)
Therefore:
EV base = 600 MPa (the minimum value from tables 6.8(a) and 6.8(b))
EH base = 300 MPa (0.5 x Ev base) &
𝑣V = 𝑣H = 0.35
Note lightly bound materials are not sublayered

Bonus Exercise 1:
Asphalt over Lightly Bound Base pavement (ALBB)
 Job Name: TMR2021-L4 ALBB

 State: Example
 ID: _Example

Bonus Exercise 1:
 Create a new SMA14 Asphalt:

 Material Type = Asphalt select in Material Type combo box!
 ID: SMA14 E1300 Vb 13 Title: SMA14 E=1300MPa Vb=13% WMAT 32C 80km/h
Properties
 Modulus = 1300.0
 Poisson’s ratio, ν = 0.4
 VB (%) = 13.0
 Performance Constant (k) = 0.006392 (calculated automatically)
Bonus Exercise 1:
Create new Lightly Bound base and subbase:

 Material Type = Unbound Granular (No sub-layering) select Material Type
 ID = LB E=240 Not Sub
 Title = Lightly Bound - E=240 MPa - Not Sublayered
 Elastic properties: Ev = 240 MPa, Poisson’s Ratio ν = 0.35

 Title = Lightly Bound - E=600 MPa - Not Sublayered
 Elastic properties: Ev = 600 MPa, Poisson’s Ratio ν = 0.35
• TMR CIRCLY 7.0 Materials Database

- if installed just select from
_TMR Lightly Bound (No sub-layering)
Bonus Exercise 1:
 ID = TMR2021-L4 ALBB
 Title = TMR 2021 - Example L.4 - Asphalt over lightly bound base pavement (ALBB)
 Asphalt: Material Type = Asphalt select Material Type combo box

 ID = SMA14 E1300 Vb 13
 Thickness = 50 mm (E = 1300MPa, ν = 0.4 )
 Unbound Granular: Material Type = Unbound Granular (No sub-layering) 

 Thickness = 100 mm (Note: starting trial thickness)
 Unbound Granular: Material Type = Unbound Granular (No sub-layering) 

Bonus Exercise 1:
 Subgrade:
 Thickness = 0
 Run Analysis Step 6 – Mechanistic-empirical modelling

Bonus Exercise 1:
No Damage Factor for Granulars
2 Click on LB E=600 Not Sub layer to design

Lightly Bound base t = 160.25 mm (seed of 100 mm) with CDF ≤ 1
(Top of subgrade so only rutting and shape loss considered)
Required thickness = 165 mm - rounded up to nearest 5 mm (refer Section 8.1)
Construction tolerance of 20 mm added so required final base thickness = 185 mm
(refer Section 8.1)
Bonus Exercise 1:
Step 7 – Minimum lightly bound base thickness

The min. lightly bound base thickness to inhibit macro-cracking is determined from
aaaaaaaaaFigure 8.2.9 – Minimum thickness of lightly bound base
Bonus Exercise 1:
Chart inputs:
Design traffic (DESA) = 1.4 x 107 ESA
EV top = EV subbase = 240 MPa (the support below the base)
From equation in Figure 8.2.9, the minimum base thickness 𝑡𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 245 mm
In Section 8.2.9 the min. base thickness from Figure 8.2.9 can be reduced by the
thickness of any overlying asphalt but lightly bound base not reduced to < 200 mm
No further construction tolerance needs to be added to the thickness determined
from Figure 8.2.9
Here there is 50 mm of overlying asphalt so the minimum base thickness can be
reduced from 245 mm to 200 mm
The 200 mm minimum base thickness is adopted as it exceeds the thickness
determined earlier in Step 6 (185 mm)
Bonus Exercise 1:
Step 8 – Check subbase and base characterisation still applicable

In Step 4 Max. EV of the lightly bound subbase considering overlying bound &
lightly bound materials was not determined as the base thickness was unknown
The base thickness from Step 7 can be used to check that the adopted subbase
modulus does not exceed the maximum value determined from Table 6.8(a)
Using a base thickness of 200 mm & EV = 600 MPa, & asphalt thickness of 50 mm
with EV = 1300 MPa:
• total thickness of overlying bound & lightly bound material = 200 + 50 = 250 mm, &
• the equivalent E of this bound material from Equation 5 in AGPT02-17 = 710 MPa
Ee = equivalent modulus of total thickness of bound material (MPa)

Ei = modulus of bound layer i (MPa)
hi = thickness of bound layer i (mm)
T = total thickness of overlying bound materials (mm
Bonus Exercise 1:
Table 6.8(a) Max. design Ev of lightly bound granular materials

considering overlying bound & lightly bound materials
Overlying E = 710 MPa so interpolated max. Ev = 460 MPa of LB material

Total thickness of Modulus of the Overlying Bound or Lightly Bound Material (MPa)1
overlying bound and 600 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
lightly bound material
Maximum Vertical Modulus of Lightly Bound Granular Material (MPa)2
(mm)
<40 600 600 600 600 600 600
75 600 600 600 590 580 570
100 600 600 570 550 530 520
125 590 570 530 510 490 470
150 570 540 500 470 440 430
175 550 510 460 430 430 430
200 520 480 430 430 430 430
225 500 460 430 430 430 430
250 470 430 430 430 430 430
275 450 430 430 430 430 430
<300 430 430 430 430 430 430
Lightly bound subbase design Ev = 240 MPa (Step 4) is < 460 MPa - no need to amend design
Note: if maximum Ev from above < than Step 4, need to repeat Steps 4 to 8
Bonus Exercise 1:
Step 9 – Adopted pavement structure

Table L.4(b) – Final pavement: asphalt over lightly bound base pavement (ALBB)
Course Description Thickness (mm)
Surfacing Asphalt SMA14 50
Prime and seal Prime plus seal -
Base Lightly bound base 200
Subbase Lightly bound subbase 150
Subgrade Design CBR 5% Semi-infinite
2
1 Change thickness to 200

Crumb Rubber Asphalt vs Binder Rich Structural Fatigue Asphalt
Type SF as base layer in thick heavy duty pavement
Sulaibiya in Kuwait has a mountain of 7M* tyres visible

from space *12.5% tyres discarded in Australia annually
Structural Fatigue Asphalt Type SF as base
layer in thick heavy duty pavement Tyre Stewardship
‘CRA paved roads exhibit improved fatigue & rutting resistance, reduced road noise
generation & improved braking distances & are expected to have a longer life-cycle,
require less maintenance and potentially require a thinner pavement’ Tyrecycle
ARRB undertaking research on using crumb rubber (tyre) for pavement on behalf of
Qld TMR, VicRoads, Main Roads WA, Tyre Stewardship Australia as well as numerous
state EPAs & state departments responsible for sustainability and environment
Crumb rubber from shredded tyres - 56 M discarded annually

Export banned 2021 tyrestewardship.org.au
Structural Fatigue Asphalt Type SF as base
layer in thick heavy duty pavement* Tyre Stewardship
Compare:
 Pavement Thickness: reduced with higher fatigue performance
CRA (Vb = 15.4%) vs Type SF (lower Vb = 12.8%)?
 Cost: is replacing base layer Type SF with CRA economical?
 CRA Modulus range: what affect?
 *Inputs from:
 POTENTIAL USE OF CRUMB RUBBER ASPHALT
FOR STRUCTURAL LAYERS: INITIAL PAVEMENT
DESIGN ANALYSIS D. Bodin et. al.
28th ARRB Int. Conference, Brisbane, Qld 2018*
*Note exact CRA properties unknown so includes an analytical study assuming
realistic parameters and varying design moduli for evaluation.
 Google “POTENTIAL USE OF CRUMB RUBBER ASPHALT FOR STRUCTURAL LAYERS:
INITIAL PAVEMENT DESIGN ANALYSIS”
Thickness Modulus, Ev
(mm) (MPa)
Wearing course 14H-60* Asphalt 40 3200
Asphalt 55
Intermediate 1 & 2 20SS-60* 4500
Asphalt 60
Base Course 20SF-60* or CRA3000* Asphalt 75 3400 or 3000
Cement treated subbase Cem500A Cement Treated 180 500 (post-cracked)
Class 4 crushed rock Gran_150 150 150

Granular
Subgrade CBR 2.5% Sub_CBR2.5 0 25

Subgrade (Infinite)

Design Speed V (km/h) = 60
 Job Name: CRA Exercise
 Traffic Load Distribution

 State: Example
 ID: _Example
 Traffic (NDT): 9.9E+7 (HVAG)
 Parametric Analysis: un-tick

Asphalt Properties
CIRCLY ‘k’ calculator uses VB (%) & E

values by 106 for
CIRCLY asphalt
fatigue constant ‘k’ *
i.e. 3810*= 3810/106
k = 0.00381
Create 3 new Asphalt elastic materials:

 ID = 14H-60
 Title = Size 14 Type H C320 60km/h (note Vb=10.5%)
 Properties: E = 3200 MPa, ν = 0.4, VB = 0.0, b = 5, k = 0.00381, SF = 6
 ID = 20SS-60
 Title = Size 20 Type SS C600 60 km/h (note Vb=10.4%)
 ID = 20SF-60
 Title = Size 20 Type SF C320 60km/h (note Vb=12.8%)
Create new CRA3000 Asphalt material:
 Create a new CRA material as follows:

 ID = CRA3000
 Title = CRA E = 3000MPa
 Young’s Modulus = 3000
 VB (Volume of Binder) = 15.4
 Exponent (b) = 5.0
Performance Constant (k) automatically calculated = 0.005526
Post-cracking phase of cemented material
Asphalt thickness on the cemented material is 230mm >= 175 mm:
post -cracking phase of the cemented material life may be considered
Note Already in Database
Material Type = Cement Stabilised (post-cracking) ID = Cem500A

Properties: Anisotropic (Ev/Eh degree of anisotropy of 2) 𝐸𝑉 = 500MPa, 𝜈𝑉 = 𝜈𝐻 = 0.35
aaaaaaaaaaand No sublayering
(6 layers using the 4 new and 2 existing materials):
New Layered System, ID = CRA Exercise, Title = CRA Exercise
Add 1st layer

Asphalt: Material Type = Asphalt  select in Material Properties combo box
Select ID = 14H-60 and add Thickness = 40 mm

New Layered System, ID = CRA Exercise, Title = CRA Exercise
 Asphalt: Material Type = Asphalt  Create 1st Layer 14H-60 (if not done yet)
 ID = 14H-60, Thickness = 40 mm
 = select via Material Type combo box
 ID = 20SS-60, Thickness = 115 mm (note intermediate courses 1 and 2 combined
to simplify late cost evaluation)

 ID = 20SF-60, Thickness = 75 mm
 Cement Treated (post-cracking): Material Type = Cement Stabilised (post-cracking) 

 ID = Cem500A, Thickness = 180 mm


 ID = Sub_CBR2.5, Thickness = 0
Results
No Damage Factor for 14H-60 surface
Make sure not ticked
Reliability = 97.5% CDF Total Damage = 1
Cf. results (2 x intermediate 20SS-60 AC)
No Damage Factor for 14H-60 surface
Note same CDF (& ETH) at

base of Intermediate layers
Reliability = 97.5% CDF Total Damage = 1
Now Replace 20SF-60 with CRA3000
1 Select Layer No. 3. 20SF-60
2 Replace 20SF-60 with CRA3000
3 Click OK
Use Automatic Thickness Design
1 Select Automatic Design Thickness
2 Select Layer No.2 to determine design thickness
3 Select Analyse
Now Replace 20SF-60 with CRA3000
Optimum Thickness* = 85 mm
(rounded to the nearest 5 mm)
*Optimum Thickness and CDF can vary CDF*

slightly depending on ‘seed’ (starting) value
Layer 2 20SS-60 T = 85 mm with CRA3000 (rounded to nearest 5 mm)

c.f. T = 115 mm with 20SF-60 so 30 mm reduction using CRA3000
Possible reduction in initial
pavement construction costs
Estimated unit price:

VicRoads provided the estimated unit costs for Type SI and Type SF asphalt as
$300/tonne and $350/tonne, respectively.
There is no current mix design for 20 mm Type CRA so VicRoads estimated that
the CRA cost would be 40% higher than Type SI asphalt (or 20% higher than
Type SF), a cost of $420/tonne.
Material Type 20 mm Type SI 20 mm Type SS 20 mm Type SF 20 mm Type CRA

(Class 320) (Class 600) (Class 320)
Unit Cost ($/t) 300 350 350 420
D. Bodin et. al.

Unit Costs *Presumed mean asphalt density = 2.4 t/m3
i.e. $300 x 2.4 = $720/m3
*
Unit Cost
Wearing course 14H-60 Asphalt $720/m3
Asphalt
Intermediate 1 & 2 20SS-60 $840/m3
Asphalt
Base Course 20SF-60 or CRA3000 Asphalt $840/m3 or
$1008/m3
add to database
Cement treated subbase Cem500A Cement Treated
$80/m3 +
Class 4 crushed rock Gran_150 Granular

$47/m3 +
Subgrade CBR 2.5% Sub_CBR2.5

Subgrade
+check databases
Cost/Area($/m2) = $0.00
Unit Costs
Entry of Unit Material Costs

Unit Costs
 Asphalt :
 ID: 14H-60
 Cost/Weight: 300
 ID: 14SF-60 and ID: 20SS-60

 ID: CRA3000
Cost Comparison between alternative designs
Base Course Cost

= 20SF-60 Reduction
= $12.60/m2
Total Cost
Previously
determined
Base Course by CIRCLY
= CRA3000
Cost Comparison
Layer Size 20 mm Unit Cost Unit Cost Thickness Price

Materials ($/t) ($/m3) (mm) ($/m2)
Base Case
Intermediate Type SS, C600 350 840 115 96.6
Base Type SF, C320 350 840 75 63.0
Total ($/m2) 159.6
CRA Alternative
Intermediate Type SS, C600 350 840 85 71.4
Base Type CRA 420 1008 75 75.6
Note: Mean asphalt density is presumed to Total ($/m2) 147.0
be 2.4t/m3, where t = tonnes Benefit ($/m2) 12.6
Previously determined by CIRCLY

$44,100/lane-km saving (3.5m lane width)
Effect of Crumb Rubber Asphalt design moduli on the intermediate

20SS-60 layer thickness:
- add three additional CRA materials (E = 3000 MPa already in database)
CRA Design
modulus (MPa) 2000 2500 3000 3500
k (Vb=15.4%*) 0.006394 0.005901 0.005526 0.005228

*The presumptive volume of binder Vb of size 20mm CRA basecourse = 15.4%
Create 3 additional CRA elastic materials:
 ID = CRA2000
 Title = CRA E=2000MPa (note Vb=15.4%)
 Elastic properties: E = 2000 MPa, Poisson’s Ratio = 0.4, b=5, k*=0.006394, SF=6
 ID = CRA2500
 ID = CRA3500
Replace CRA3000 with CRA2000
1 Select Layer No. 3. CRA3000
2 Replace CRA3000 with CRA2000
3 Click OK
Use Automatic Thickness Design
1 Select Automatic Design Thickness
2 Select Layer No.2 to determine design thickness
3 Select Analyse
CRA2000,CRA2500,CRA3000 & CRA3500
thickness
CRA2500
CRA3000
CRA3500
Effect of Crumb Rubber Asphalt design modulus E on

the intermediate type 20SS-60 layer thickness
CRA Design
modulus (MPa) 2000 2500 3000 3500
20SS-60 99 82 83 84
Thickness (mm)
Reduction in 16 33 32 31
Thickness (mm)*
*compared to 115 mm thickness with a SF-60 Base
CRA with E = 2500 to 3500 MPa: t = 85 mm (rounded up to nearest 5 mm)

so effectively a 30 mm reduction compared to 20SS-60
(Note little difference in thickness for different CRA E values for this model)
Example of Specialised Vehicle Analysis
96 kms of road to relocate 3,500 tonne dragline from Goonyella Riverside Mine to
South Walker Creek Mine in Moranbah Qld. Used Self Propelled Modular Transport -
required design of road pavement & road crossings, including pavement overlays
Bonus Exercise 3:
Use: General Design & General Analysis Methods

Calculate critical strains under Crane Axles (assume no interaction) &
determine # of Standard Axle repetitions that causes the same damage
Total damage in single crane pass = sum of damage due to each axle
Crane operated over 10 years with one crane load repetition per day
Each axle 2 x 20.5R25 tyres at 551kPa pressure and 2640mm c-to-c
*AGPT02-17 Appendix J:
Procedures for Evaluation of Pavement Damage Due to Specialised Vehicles
*See for full details of the design and analysis approach
Bonus Exercise 3:
Axle 1 set up only in this exercise

Axle Axle load Tyre load Tyre radius Contact stress
(kN) (kN) (mm) (kPa)
Axle 1 116.7 58.35 149.9 826
Axle 2 119.2 59.58 151.0 832
Axle 3 117.7 58.84 150.4 829
Axle 4 119.2 59.58 151.0 832
Axle 5 120.1 60.07 151.4 834
Axle 6 121.1 60.56 151.8 837
0 mm 2640 mm
Y
Direction
of Axle 1
Travel X
Plan View
Asphalt
CIRCLY used to check interaction with
crane minimum 1850 mm axle separation:
(little interaction found for this pavement)
Subgrade
2640 mm Subgrade
wheel separation
1850 mm axle separation

Bonus Exercise 3:
Asphalt AC3000* Asphalt 80 mm 3000 MPa

Vb=11% k=0.004067
Unbound Granular Gran_330* Granular 450 mm 330 MPa
Subgrade 0 mm 50 MPa
Subgrade (CBR 5%) Sub_CBR5 Semi-infinite

AGPT02-17
Bonus Exercise 3:
 Job Name: App J Crane
Set Design Method: General Design

Bonus Exercise 3:
ICON TASK: ACTION

Create 2 new materials:
 ID = AC3000
 Title = AC3000, Vb=11%
 Elastic properties: E = 3000 MPa, ν = 0.4, VB = 11, b = 5, k = 0.004067, SF = 6
 Material Type = Unbound Granular (Austroads 2004 sub-layering)  select via combo box
 ID = Gran_330
 Title = Granular, E=330MPa
 Elastic properties: E = 330 MPa, Poisson’s Ratio = 0.35
Bonus Exercise 3:
New Layered System, ID = App J Crane, Title = Austroads App J Crane
 Asphalt: Material Type = Asphalt  = select via Material Properties combo box
 ID = AC3000, Thickness = 80 mm


 ID = Sub_CBR5, Thickness = 0
Bonus Exercise 3:
Axle 1 Y 2640 mm
0 mm Plan View
X
Direction
of
Travel Axle 1
Tyre Footprint
(assumed circular) X
0
Bonus Exercise 3:
Create new Load Group ‘AppJ Axle 1’

ID = AppJ Axle 1 Title = App J Axle 1
Plot Label = AppJ 1, Radius = 149.9, Contact Stress= 0.826
mm MPa
Bonus Exercise 3:
2 3
Add X = 0.0 and Y = 0.0
Add X = 2640.0 and Y = 0.0

Bonus Exercise 3:
Create new Traffic ‘App J’

ID = App J Title = App J
Add new Load Groups App J Axle 1, and Movements = 1
2 Select App J Axle 1 from Load Groups list

4
Movements
=1
Bonus Exercise 3:
Results along a line

Y
Direction of Travel
Results points
0
X
0
-200 200
Xmin Xdel Xmax
View Result Files
Select ‘Print’
ε H tensile = 443με
ε V compressive = 976με
Bonus Exercise 3:
Use General Analysis to Graphically show strains:
Set Design Method: General Analysis

Bonus Exercise 3:
Results along a line: critical strain locations
80 mm
Base of Asphalt
530 mm
Top of
Subgrade
Bonus Exercise 3:
1
Click Component Type 2
Exx at Z=80mm (Asphalt Base) Click for options
Horizontal Strain
3
Select Strain
4
Click Component
5
Click for options
6
Select xx-component
General Analysis Graph
Exx at Z=80mm
(Asphalt Base)
Horizontal Strain App J result
80mm (Base of Asphalt)
Right mouse click

for value
Exx = Eyy = 443 με (microstrain)

Bonus Exercise 3:
1
Ezz (vertical) at Z=530mm Click Component Type 2
(Top of Subgrade) Click for options
Vertical compressive strain
3
Select Strain
4
Click Component
5
Click for options
6
Select Vertical
General Analysis Graph
Ezz (vertical) at Z=530mm
(Top of Subgrade - Vertical
compressive strain) App J result
530mm (Top of Subgrade) Right mouse click

for value
Ezz = 976 με
Bonus Exercise 3:
Next calculate critical strains for Standard Axle (SADT)
Create new Traffic ‘App J SADT’
ID = App J SADT Title = App J SADT
Add Load Group ESA75-Full and Movements = 1
1
3
2 Select ESA75-Full*
* ESA75-Full already in
Load Group Database
4
Bonus Exercise 3:
Calculate the critical strains under Standard Axle (SADT)

Set Design Method: General Design
ε H = 325με (tensile)
ε V = 604με (comp.)
Set Design Method: General Analysis to see strain graphs
Exx (horiz.) at Z=80mm
(Asphalt Base)
App J result
80mm (Base of Asphalt)
Right mouse click

for value
Eyy = 325 με
Ezz (vertical) at Z=530mm
(Top of Subgrade)
App J result
Right mouse click

for value
530mm (Top of Subgrade)
Ezz = 604 με
Bonus Exercise 3:
Calculate Relative Damage by the Crane Axle
F ε under Crane Axle* I m

RDm =
Hε under Standard Axle K
Use m = 4 permanent deformation
= 5 asphalt fatigue
Relative Damage:
pass of Crane Axle vs Standard Axle
with load damage exponent m
* Repeat for all crane axles in a full analysis
AGPT02-17
Bonus Exercise 3:
Crane axle Relative Damage Relative Damage
Asphalt m = 5 Permanent deformation m = 4
1 (443/324)5= 4.77 (976/604)4= 6.82
2 to 6
Total 6 Axles 30 44
For Crane Axle 1:

Asphalt fatigue - same damage as 4.8 passes Standard Axle
Permanent Deformation - same damage as 6.8 passes Standard Axle
The Relative Damage for each axle are combined* providing the overall
damage caused by a single pass of the crane for both distress modes
*See App J for the full analysis details
AGPT02-17
Bonus Exercise 3:
Specialised Vehicle - Six Axle Mobile Crane
Damage for a single pass of the 6 axle mobile crane:
Total (All Axles) 30 44
Damage for single pass of crane for:
Asphalt fatigue = 30 passes of the Standard Axle
Permanent deformation = 44 passes of the Standard Axle
Crane load repetitions over 10-year period = 10 x 365 = 3650

Damage due to the crane over a 10-year period for:
(Design Traffic repetitions n )
Asphalt Fatigue = 3650 x 30 = 1.1 × 105 repetitions of the Standard Axle
Permanent Deformation = 3650 x 44 = 1.6 × 105 repetitions of the Standard Axle
AGPT02-17
Bonus Exercise 3:
Asphalt fatigue:
N = Allowable Number of Repetitions of Standard Axle
due to all traffic during the design period:
F I
SF k 5 6 F 0.004067I 5
6 H 0.000325 K
= 3.1 x 105
RF H K
N = =
ε H tensile = 325με (from SADT analysis)
Permanent deformation: N = allowable number of Standard Axle repetitions:
F 0.00915 7
I F 0.00915 I 7
N =
H =
K H 0.000604K = 1.8 x 108
ε V compressive = 604με AGPT02-17
Bonus Exercise 3:
Calculate relative damage by the Crane Axle
Crane loading compared to allowable loadings for each distress mode
N n
Distress mode Allowable repetitions Design traffic due to the % of life consumed by
of the Standard Axle crane over 10 years crane over 10 years
Asphalt fatigue 3.1 * 105 1.1 x 105 (1.1/3.1) = 0.36 = 36%
Permanent 1.8 * 108 1.6 x105 < 1%
deformation
Overall pavement life:

Governed by the allowable loading in terms of asphalt fatigue
Conclusion:
Crane consumes 36% of the pavement life over its 10-yr service life
AGPT02-17
Bonus Exercise 3:
Alternative Solution
Simplify Exercise:
Determine average for all axles and x 6 instead of each
individually – can do as the axle loads are similar
Use Axle 2 or 4 as about the average
Axle Axle load Tyre load Tyre radius Contact stress
(kN) (kN) (mm) (kPa)
Axle 1 116.7 58.35 149.9 826
Axle 2* 119.2 59.58 151.0 832
Note
Axle 3 117.7 58.84 150.4 829
Same
Axle 4* 119.2 59.58 151.0 832
Axle 5 120.1 60.07 151.4 834
Axle 6 121.1 60.56 151.8 837
Bonus Exercise 3:
Create Load Group App J Axle 2 & 4

ID = App J Axle 2 & 4 Title = App J Axle 2 & 4
Plot Label = App J 2 & 4 Radius = 151, Contact Stress= 0.832
Tyre radius Contact stress
(mm) (kPa)
151.0 832
Create new Traffic ‘App J Axle 2 & 4’

ID = App J Axle 2 & 4 Title = App J Axle 2 & 4
add new Load Groups AppJ Axle 2 & 4, and Movements =1
Design Method:
General Design
ε H tensile
= 448με
ε V compressive
= 997με
Bonus Exercise 3: Six Axle Mobile Crane
Simplify by using average axle x 6 for the crane -
Damage for a single pass of the 6 axle mobile crane:
Load damage exponent

2 & 4 (average) (448/325*)5= 5 (997/604*)4= 7.4 *from SADT
analysis
X 6 axles = Total (6 x 5) = 30 (6 x 7.4) = 44
Same damage for: asphalt fatigue = 30 passes of the Standard Axle
permanent deformation = 44 passes of the Standard Axle
Crane load repetitions over 10 year period = 10 x 365 = 3650 (single pass/day)
Damage due to the crane over a 10 year period for:
(Design Traffic repetitions n )
Asphalt Fatigue = 3650 x 30 = 1.1 × 105 repetitions of the Standard Axle
Permanent Deformation = 3650 x 44 = 1.6 × 105 repetitions of the Standard Axle
AGPT02-17
Bonus Exercise 3: Six axle mobile crane
For movements (Design Traffic repetitions n ) use:
1.1 × 105 only for AC3000 CDF & 1.6 × 105 only for Sub_CBR5 CDF
Use for AC3000 Asphalt Fatigue only
CDF = 0.36
(36% - 3.6yrs
Life used)
(Asphalt AC3000 weakest link)
Use for Sub_CBR5 only
(< 1% Life
used)
CDF = 0.0009
Bonus Exercise 3:
Crane loading compared to the allowable loadings for each distress mode (Table 8)
Distress mode Allowable repetitions Design traffic due to Percentage of life
of the Standard Axle the crane over 10 years consumed by the crane
over 10 years
Asphalt fatigue 3.1 x 105 1.1 X 105 36%
Permanent deformation 1.8 x 105 1.6 x 105 <1%
CIRCLY CDF = 0.36 & 0.0009
Overall pavement life is governed by the allowable loading in terms of asphalt

fatigue - the crane consumes about 36% of pavement life over its 10-yr service life
Note the analysis needs to be undertaken on the full range of pavement types the
crane will load as the % damage varies markedly with the pavement configuration
AGPT02-17
Bonus Exercise 3:
Specialised Vehicle - Six Axle Mobile Crane AC3000 CDF
CDF = 0.36
Bonus Exercise 3:
Specialised Vehicle - Six Axle Mobile Crane Sub_CBR5 CDF
CDF = 8.7E-4
Specialised Vehicle:
Tracked
CIRCLY: Use General Analysis

Rectangular tracks (dozers, etc)
modelled by equivalent circular loads:
same contact area & consequently
contact pressure – do complex loading
via different input contact stresses for
individual circular loads
Komatsu D155AX-8 LGP dozer
ground pressure = 53 kPa
(SADT = 750 kPa)
Can model with

< circular loads
Szz Z = 0m Szz Z = -0.5m

The End

CIRCLY 7.0 Workshop - Australia - December 2022 - One Slide Per Page

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CIRCLY 7.0 Workshop - Australia - December 2022 - One Slide Per Page

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CIRCLY Workshop

Rev. December 2022

• Powerful CIRCLY • User Interface

Austroads calls Mechanistic - Empirical Procedure (MEP)

Traffic : blocks on sleds

Mortuary Temple basalt

Six by two-lane Test Loops Cost about USD$650M (2018)

18hr/day for a million load applications 468 Asphalt Sections

‘The Fourth Power Law’

Overall Pavement Damage (traffic loading)4

Overall Pavement Damage caused by a particular load

-165 0 165 1800 mm

Wheel Loading = 20 kN (2.05 tonnes)

(Used to standardise various axle configurations & loads)

Design chart for unbound granular pavements with

ALF full-scale pavement test system (ARRB):

ALF multiple-axle rolling wheel loading assembly applied over 12 m of pavement

Only applicable to pavements comprising:

 unbound layers of granular material

 surfaced with either:

• Selected subgrades 800 3

Cannot provide designs for pavement structures involving:

Motivation for Mechanistic Design

Asphalt < 40mm

If sprayed seal or asphalt surface layer < 40 mm thick

 inadequate for the impact of traffic loads on thin surfacings

 cannot assess fatigue in mechanistic model

Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2:

Cemented materials: Similar thickness

1st Heavy Duty Asphalt example: *107 ESA

Austroads 2004-12 Design

Austroads 2012 Austroads 2017

after webinar presented on 9 March 2018 by Dr. Michael Moffatt (ARRB)

 Covers pavement investigation, testing and

 Edition 4.1 (Nov 2019) aligns structural

 Webinar: Guide to Pavement Technology Part 5:

• Australia is a large continent with a wide range of climates

 Transport for NSW (TfNSW) formly RMS – August 2018

 Queensland Pavement Design Supplement – June 2021

 Western Australia - Main Roads Western Australia

 New Zealand - NZ Transport Agency

WARRIP research collaboration with ARRB produced a summary of changes to

Engineering Road Note 9 (ERN9) (2018):

Download – Google: RC 500.22

• Note spreadsheet can also be downloaded

(LAYERS7.cmdb) • CIRCLY 7.0 Database

Supplement to Part 5: Pavement Evaluation and Treatment Design of the Austroads

Combined with AGPT05 the TMR Pavement Design Supplement provides an

‘pavement rehabilitation’ is ‘any activity that improves the functional or structural

The types of pavements covered include:

• Version3.0 – August 2018

The procedure consists of:

Critical Strains Calculated

‘Care must be taken to ensure that the sophistication of the

Can conduct parametric analyses with CIRCLY to test the sensitivity

Design Traffic for fatigue damage of described by HVAG & TLD:

Model candidate pavement with axle types/loads in TLD, &

Design relates performance to strains

Unbound Granular Materials

 Design Traffic for permanent deformation of subgrade,

3 rutting & loss of surface shape - vertical strain at top of subgrade

Design relates performance to strains

Unbound Granular Materials

Class 3 to 12 Heavy Vehicles*: