IRC:58-2015 Guidelines for Design of

Plain Jointed Rigid Pavements for Highways

Example of Design of Slab Thickness for Pavement
(with and without doweled transverse joints. Beta value will be 0.66 for doweled joint and 0.90 for without dowels case)
Type of pavement considered Pavement Structural Details

Carriageway 1.5 Modulus of subgrade reaction of subgrade, MPa/m 42

Thickness of Granular Subbase, mm 200

Shoulders :- Tied concrete shoulders ? (yes/no) no Thickness of Dry Lean Concrete subbase, mm 100

Transverse joint spacing (m) 4.5 Effective

MPa/m
modulus of subgrade reaction of foundation,
158.41

Lane width (m) 3.5 Unit weight of Concrete, kN/m 3 24

Transverse Joints have dowel bars? (yes/no) yes 28-day Flexural strength of cement concrete, MPa 4.5
Max. day-time Temperature Differential in slab, 0C (for
Design Traffic Estimation bottom-up cracking)
15.8

10 Night-time Temperature Differential in slab, C (for top-

0
Design Period (years) 12.9
down cracking) = day-time diff/2 + 5
Total Two-way Commercial Traffic (cvpd) in the year of
215.00 Trial Thickness of Concrete Slab, m 0.26
completion of construction
Av. Annual rate of growth of commercial traffic Load Transfer Efficiency Factor for TDC analysis, Beta =
0.05 0.66
(expressed as decimal) 0.66 for dowel Joints, 0.90 for joints without dowels
Cumulative No of Commercial vehicles during design
987050 Elastic Modulus of Concrete, Ec (MPa) 30000
period (two-way), A
Average No of axles per commercial vehicle, B 2.35 Poisson's Ratio of Concrete, Mu 0.15
Cumulative No of Commercial Axles during design
2319568 Radius of relative stiffness, m 0.72986
period (two-way), C = A*B
Proportion of traffic in predominant direction (For 2-
lane 2-way highways use a value of 1.0), D
1.00 Design Axle Load Repetitions for Fatigue Analysis

Lateral Placement factor (0.25 for 2-lane 2-way. For

multilane highways the value is 0.25 X C), E
0.250 For Bottom-up Cracking Analysis

Factor for selection of traffic for BUC analysis (for six-

0.2 Front single (steering) Axles = H * K1 64948
hour period during day), F

Factor for selection of traffic for TDC analysis (for six-

0.3 Rear single Axles = H * K2 2320
hour period during day), G
Design axle repetitions for BUC analysis (for 6 hour day
115978 Tandem Axles = H * K3 16933
time traffic), H = B*E*F

Proportion of vehicles with spacing between front and

the first rear axle less than the spacing of transverse 0.55 Tridem Axles = H * K4 31778
joints, I
Design axle repetitions for TDC analysis (for 6-hour
night time traffic), J = B*E*G*I
95682 For Top-Down Cracking Analysis

Proportion of Front single (steering) Axles, K1 0.560 Front single (steering) Axles = J * K1 53582
Proportion of Rear single Axles,K2 0.020 Rear single Axles = J * K2 1914
Proportion of tandem Axles, K3 0.146 Tandem Axles = J * K3 13970
Proportion of Tridem Axles, K4 = (1-K1-K2-K3) 0.274 Tridem Axles = J * K4 26217
 Fatigue Damage Analysis
Axle Load Spectrum Data
Bottom-up Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Day-time (6 hour) traffic and Top-Down Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Nig
Positive Temperature Differential

Rear Single Axle Rear Tandem Axle Rear Tridem Axle Rear Single Axles Rear Tandem Axles Rear Single Axles

Load Mid-Point of Frequency Load Group Mid-Point of Frequency Load Mid-Point of Frequency Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue
Group Load Group (%) (kN) Load Group (%) Group Load Group (%) Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Ratio (SR) Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni)

185-195 190 17.15 380 - 400 390 17.2 530-560 545 0 398 3.470 0.701 1866 0.213 2912 2.92471 0.591 39887.0931 0.073 328 2.544 0.514 413739 0.001

175-185 180 17.43 360 - 380 370 21.1 500-530 515 10.85 404 3.330 0.673 4084 0.099 3573 2.81308 0.568 74678.8675 0.048 334 2.479 0.501 730855 0.000
165-175 170 18.27 340 - 360 350 11.42 470-500 485 3.44 424 3.191 0.645 8937 0.047 1934 2.70145 0.546 140468.863 0.014 350 2.415 0.488 1456200 0.000

155-165 160 11.98 320 - 340 330 2.5 440-470 455 7.12 278 3.052 0.616 19556 0.014 423 2.58982 0.523 290237.444 0.001 229 2.351 0.475 3492437 0.000

145-155 150 3.98 300 - 320 310 3.4 410-440 425 10.11 92 2.912 0.588 42794 0.002 576 2.47819 0.501 738770.089 0.001 76 2.286 0.462 11573358 0.000

135-145 140 2.62 280 - 300 290 1.26 380-410 395 12.01 61 2.773 0.560 93645 0.001 213 2.36655 0.478 2747269.85 0.000 50 2.222 0.449 infinite 0.000

125-135 130 1.62 260 - 280 270 4.11 350-380 365 16.95 38 2.633 0.532 214412 0.000 696 2.25492 0.456 25559516.9 0.000 31 2.157 0.436 infinite 0.000

115-125 120 3.65 240 - 260 250 5.19 320-350 335 13.28 85 2.494 0.504 635991 0.000 879 2.14329 0.433 infinite 0.000 70 2.093 0.423 infinite 0.000

105-115 110 2.65 220 - 240 230 6.32 290-320 305 4.97 61 2.355 0.476 3281405 0.000 1070 2.03166 0.410 infinite 0.000 51 2.029 0.410 infinite 0.000

95-105 100 3.2 200 - 220 210 7.45 260-290 275 3.16 74 2.215 0.448 infinite 0.000 1261 1.92003 0.388 infinite 0.000 61 1.964 0.397 infinite 0.000

85-95 90 3.3 180 - 200 190 9.94 230-260 245 3.1 77 2.076 0.419 infinite 0.000 1683 1.8084 0.365 infinite 0.000 63 1.900 0.384 infinite 0.000

< 85 80 14.15 < 180 170 10.11 < 230 215 15.01 328 1.936 0.391 infinite 0.000 1712 1.69676 0.343 infinite 0.000 271 1.836 0.371 infinite 0.000

100 100 100 2320 Fat Dam from Sing. Axles = 0.377 16933 Fat Dam from Tand Axles = 0.137 1914 Fat Dam from Sing. Axles = 0.002

Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage due to single and

tandem axle loads =
0.377 + 0.137 = 0.514 Total Top-Down Fati
Front Single Axles and Rear Tridem axles not considered for bottom-up analysis
Sum of CFD for BUC & TDC= 0.533 DESIGN IS SAFE SINC

Design for Bonded Pavement Option

Subgrade CBR (%)= 40.6 Trial Slab thickness (m) over DLC, h1 0.3 Poisson's Ratio of DLC, m2 0.2 Total Flexural Stiffness

Granular Subabse Thickness (mm) = 150 Provide DLC thickness (m), h2 0.15 Depth to Neutral axis, m (See Fig.6) 0.19 which is more than th
Effective k-value from Tables 2 and 3 (MPa/m) = 49.8 Elastic Modulus of Pavement Concrete (MPa), E1 30000 Flex Stiffness of design Slab 69.05 Hence, Provide a Slab
For k of 49.8 MPa/m and for Elastic Modulus of DLC (MPa), E2 13600 Flex Stiffness of Partial Slab Provided 84.97 Slab thickness (h1) ov
Doweled Joint and Tied Concrete Shoulders, Slab Thickness (m) = 0.3 Poisson's Ratio of Paving Concrete, m1 0.15 Flex Stiffness of DLC 34.22 design stiffness with t
Analysis

e Analysis for Night-time (6 hour) traffic and Negative Temperature Differential

Rear Tandem Axles Rear Tridem Axles

(Stess computed for 50% of axle load) (Stress computed for 33% of
axle load)
Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Ratio Allowable Fatigue
Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress (SR) Repetitions Damage
(ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (Ni) (ni/Ni)

2403 2.57584 0.520 321836 0.007 0 2.49 0.503 659998 0.000

2948 2.51148 0.507 543135 0.005 2845 2.4257 0.490 1284485 0.002
1595 2.44712 0.494 1013086 0.002 902 2.3613 0.477 2967035 0.000

349 2.38276 0.481 2190287 0.000 1867 2.2969 0.464 9170471 0.000

475 2.31839 0.468 6019786 0.000 2651 2.2326 0.451 52125404 0.000

176 2.25403 0.455 26223204 0.000 3149 2.1682 0.438 infinite 0.000

574 2.18967 0.442 infinite 0.000 4444 2.1039 0.425 infinite 0.000

725 2.12531 0.429 infinite 0.000 3482 2.0395 0.412 infinite 0.000

883 2.06094 0.416 infinite 0.000 1303 1.9751 0.399 infinite 0.000

1041 1.99658 0.403 infinite 0.000 828 1.9108 0.386 infinite 0.000

1389 1.93222 0.390 infinite 0.000 813 1.8464 0.373 infinite 0.000

1412 1.86786 0.377 infinite 0.000 3935 1.782 0.360 infinite 0.000

13970 Fat Dam from Tand Axles = 0.015 26217 Fat Dam from Tridem Axles = 0.003

Total Top-Down Fatigue Damage = 0.002 + 0.015 + 0.003 = 0.019

DESIGN IS SAFE SINCE SUM OF CFD FOR BUC AND TDC< OR EQ.1

Total Flexural Stiffness Provided = 84.97 + 34.22 = 119.19

which is more than the Flexural Stiffness of the Design Slab = 69.05
Hence, Provide a Slab of thickness (m) 0.3 over DLC of thickness (m) 0.15
Slab thickness (h1) over DLC layer may be obtained by iteratively changing h1 and matching the
design stiffness with the combined stiffness provided
 TRAFFIC CENSUS
(FOR DESIGN OF CRUST BY IRC:37-2012 & IRC:SP:62-2014)
WEEKLY TRAFFIC SUMMARY
FROM- BAHRAICH SITAPUR UP/DOWN
Date-12.10.2012 to 15.10.2022
DETAILS OF CENSUS POINT- KM 52
REF: IRC-9-1972 & IRC:64-1990 Distt- SITAPUR State- U.P.

From TO FAST VEHICLES SLOW VEHICLES

PASSENGER LIGHT AGRICULTURAL TRACTOR TRUCK
MOTOR HORSE TOTAL
CAR, PICK UP COMMERCIAL CYCLES BULLOCK BULLOCK
Date Hour Date Hour CYCLES &
VAN OR AUTO VEHICLE WITHOUT WITH BUS
MCV / HCV TRAILOR
CYCLES
RICKSHAW
HAND CART DRAWN
CART (SMALL) CART
SCOOTERS TRAILOR TRAILOR VEHICLE
RICKSHAW (LCV)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
12.10.22 16 13.10.22 8 5926 2658 2205 120 280 235 333 109 2558 0 0 0 0 0
13.10.22 16 14.10.22 8 5862 2704 2315 85 310 256 318 65 3050 0 0 0 0 0
14.10.22 16 15.10.22 8 5177 2856 2285 43 198 234 335 71 2580 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL FOR THE WEEK 16965 8218 6805 248 788 725 986 245 8188 0 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 5655.00 2739.33 2268.33 82.67 262.67 241.67 328.67 81.67 2729.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PCU FACTOR 0.50 1.00 1.50 1.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.50 0.50 2.00 3.00 4.00 6.00 8.00
PCU 2827.50 2739.33 3402.50 124.00 788.00 725.00 986.00 367.50 1364.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13325.00
CVPD 915.00
 single axle load Tandem axle load
Axle Load Class Expected Axle Load Class Expected
CVPD CVPD
(KN) Repetition (KN) Repetition
185-195 11655914 651 380 - 400 196951 11
175-185 0 360 - 380 0
165-175 0 340 - 360 0
155-165 0 320 - 340 0
145-155 0 300 - 320 0
135-145 0 280 - 300 0
125-135 0 260 - 280 0
115-125 0 240 - 260 0
105-115 0 220 - 240 0
95-105 0 200 - 220 0
85-95 0 180 - 200 0
< 85 0 < 180 0
 Tridem axle load
Axle Load Class Expected
CVPD
(KN) Repetition
530-560 179046 10
500-530 0
470-500 0
440-470 0
410-440 0
380-410 0
350-380 0
320-350 0
290-320 0
260-290 0
230-260 0
< 230 0
 Design of Tie Bars Input
Slab Thickness w 0.28 mm 0.28
Lane Length b 3.50 m 3.50
Coefficient of friction f 1.50 1.50
Density of concrete 24.00 KN/m3 24.00
Allowable tensile stress in plane bars (as per IRC: 15-2011) Sst 125.00 Mpa 125.00
Allowable tensile stress in deformed bars (as per IRC: 15-2011) Sst 200.00 Mpa 200
Allowable bond stress for plain tie bars B* 1.75 Mpa 1.75
Allowable bond stress for deformed tie bars B* 2.46 Mpa 2.46
Design of plain bars
Select diameter of tie bars dt 12 mm
Area of plain steel bars required per meter width of joint to rsist
the frictional force at slab bottom =(bfw/S st) As 282.24 mm2/m
Cross sectional area of tie bars =(d t2x∏/4) A 113.04 mm2
Perimeter of tie bars =∏xdt Pptb 37.68 mm
Spacing of tie bars A/As 400.51 mm
Provide spacing 370 mm
length of tie bar, =2xSstxA/(B*xPptb)
Therefore the required length of tie bars (increase length by L 428.57 mm
100mm for loss of bond due to painting and other 50mm for L 578.57 mm
tolerance in placement.
Provide Length of tie bar H 580 mm
Design of deformed bars
Select diameter of tie bars dt 12 mm
Area of plain steel bars required per meter width of joint to rsist
the frictional force at slab bottom =(bfw/S st) As 176.4 mm2/m
Cross sectional area of tie bars =(d t2x∏/4) A 113.04 mm2
Perimeter of tie bars =∏xdt Pptb 37.68 mm
Spacing of tie bars A/As 640.82 mm
Provide spacing 600 mm
length of tie bar, =2xSstxA/(B xPptb)
*
Therefore the required length of tie bars (increase length by L 487.80 mm
100mm for loss of bond due to painting and other 50mm for L 637.80 mm
tolerance in placement.
Provide Length of tie bar H 640 mm
 Design of Dowel Bars

Slab Thickness , h 300

Joint Width, Z (20 for expansion joint & 8 nn for contraction joint) 20

Modulus of Subgrade Reaction k 42

Radius of relative stiffness l 1035.3

E for Dowl bars E 200000

Modulus of Dowls Support Kmds 415000

Maximum Single Axel Load 190
Maximum Single wheel Load (Considering dual wheel as single wheel for safe design) 95
Assume a load transfer of 30 % at terminal stage to the tide concrete shoulder. If no tide 66.5
concrete shoulder is provided no load transfer.
Wheel Load to be considered for dowel bar design 0.7
Safety of the dowel bar may be examine 66.5
Assume the percentage of load transfer through dowl bars is 0.5

Permissible in concrete is calculated Fb = (101.6-bd) fck/95.25

Characterstick Compressive fck 40

Diameter of Dowl Bars bd 36

Permissible in concrete is calculated Fb 27.549

Spacing between the dowels bar 300
First dowel bar will be placed at adistance of 150mm c/c
Assume length of dowel bar 500
Dowels bar upto a distance of 1.0 * Radius of relative stiffness from the point of load
application are effective in load transfer

No of dowels bars participating in load transfer when the wheel load is just over the dowels bar 4.451
close to the edge slab= (1+l/spacing)

Assume that load transfer by the first dowels is Pt and the the load on the dowl bars at a 33.270
distace 1 from the first dowel is zero, the total load transferred by dowel bar system (1+(l-
spacing)/l+(l-600)/l+(l-900)/l)*Pt

Load carried by the outer Dowel bar (Pt)=( safety load for dowl*load transfer to 14.712
dowel bar/2.26)

Moment of inertia of dowel bar I=(∏*(bd)4)/64 82406.16

Relative stiffness of dowel bar embeded in concrete β=4√(Kmds bd/ 4EI) 0.022
Bearing stress in Dowels Bar Fbmax= ((Pt*Kmds)*(2+β*Z)/(4*β3*E*I) 21.72447

Safe if less than Fb SAFE

mm
mm
Mpa/m
mm
Mpa
Mpa/m
KN
KN

KN

Mpa
mm
Mpa
mm

mm

No

KN

mm4
Mpa
 IRC:58-2015 Guidelines for Design of
Plain Jointed Rigid Pavements for Highways
Example of Design of Slab Thickness for Pavement
(with and without doweled transverse joints. Beta value will be 0.66 for doweled joint and 0.90 for without dowels case)
Type of pavement considered Pavement Structural Details

Carriageway 1.5 Modulus of subgrade reaction of subgrade, MPa/m 40.46

Thickness of Granular Subbase, mm 200

Shoulders :- Tied concrete shoulders ? (yes/no) no Thickness of Dry Lean Concrete subbase, mm 100

Transverse joint spacing (m) 4.5 Effective

MPa/m
modulus of subgrade reaction of foundation,
158.41

Lane width (m) 3.5 Unit weight of Concrete, kN/m 3 24

Transverse Joints have dowel bars? (yes/no) yes 28-day Flexural strength of cement concrete, MPa 4.5
Max. day-time Temperature Differential in slab, 0C (for
Design Traffic Estimation bottom-up cracking)
15.8

10 Night-time Temperature Differential in slab, C (for top-

0
Design Period (years) 12.9
down cracking) = day-time diff/2 + 5
Total Two-way Commercial Traffic (cvpd) in the year of
215.00 Trial Thickness of Concrete Slab, m 0.26
completion of construction
Av. Annual rate of growth of commercial traffic Load Transfer Efficiency Factor for TDC analysis, Beta =
0.05 0.66
(expressed as decimal) 0.66 for dowel Joints, 0.90 for joints without dowels
Cumulative No of Commercial vehicles during design
987050 Elastic Modulus of Concrete, Ec (MPa) 30000
period (two-way), A
Average No of axles per commercial vehicle, B 2.35 Poisson's Ratio of Concrete, Mu 0.15
Cumulative No of Commercial Axles during design
2319568 Radius of relative stiffness, m 0.72986
period (two-way), C = A*B
Proportion of traffic in predominant direction (For 2-
lane 2-way highways use a value of 1.0), D
1.00 Design Axle Load Repetitions for Fatigue Analysis

Lateral Placement factor (0.25 for 2-lane 2-way. For

multilane highways the value is 0.25 X C), E
0.250 For Bottom-up Cracking Analysis

Factor for selection of traffic for BUC analysis (for six-

0.2 Front single (steering) Axles = H * K1 64948
hour period during day), F

Factor for selection of traffic for TDC analysis (for six-

0.3 Rear single Axles = H * K2 2320
hour period during day), G
Design axle repetitions for BUC analysis (for 6 hour day
115978 Tandem Axles = H * K3 16933
time traffic), H = B*E*F

Proportion of vehicles with spacing between front and

the first rear axle less than the spacing of transverse 0.55 Tridem Axles = H * K4 31778
joints, I
Design axle repetitions for TDC analysis (for 6-hour
night time traffic), J = B*E*G*I
95682 For Top-Down Cracking Analysis

Proportion of Front single (steering) Axles, K1 0.560 Front single (steering) Axles = J * K1 53582
Proportion of Rear single Axles,K2 0.020 Rear single Axles = J * K2 1914
Proportion of tandem Axles, K3 0.146 Tandem Axles = J * K3 13970
Proportion of Tridem Axles, K4 = (1-K1-K2-K3) 0.274 Tridem Axles = J * K4 26217
 Fatigue Damage
Axle Load Spectrum Data
Bottom-up Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Day-time (6 hour) traffic and
Positive Temperature Differential

Rear Single Axle Rear Tandem Axle Rear Tridem Axle Rear Single Axles Rear Tandem Axles

Load Mid-Point of Frequency Load Group Mid-Point of Frequency Load Mid-Point of Frequency Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue
Group Load Group (%) (kN) Load Group (%) Group Load Group (%) Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Ratio (SR) Repetitions Damage
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (Ni) (ni/Ni)

185-195 190 17.15 380 - 400 390 17.2 530-560 545 0 398 3.470 0.701 1866 0.213 2912 2.92471 0.591 39887.0931 0.073

175-185 180 17.43 360 - 380 370 21.1 500-530 515 10.85 404 3.330 0.673 4084 0.099 3573 2.81308 0.568 74678.8675 0.048
165-175 170 18.27 340 - 360 350 11.42 470-500 485 3.44 424 3.191 0.645 8937 0.047 1934 2.70145 0.546 140468.863 0.014

155-165 160 11.98 320 - 340 330 2.5 440-470 455 7.12 278 3.052 0.616 19556 0.014 423 2.58982 0.523 290237.444 0.001

145-155 150 3.98 300 - 320 310 3.4 410-440 425 10.11 92 2.912 0.588 42794 0.002 576 2.47819 0.501 738770.089 0.001

135-145 140 2.62 280 - 300 290 1.26 380-410 395 12.01 61 2.773 0.560 93645 0.001 213 2.36655 0.478 2747269.85 0.000

125-135 130 1.62 260 - 280 270 4.11 350-380 365 16.95 38 2.633 0.532 214412 0.000 696 2.25492 0.456 25559516.9 0.000

115-125 120 3.65 240 - 260 250 5.19 320-350 335 13.28 85 2.494 0.504 635991 0.000 879 2.14329 0.433 infinite 0.000

105-115 110 2.65 220 - 240 230 6.32 290-320 305 4.97 61 2.355 0.476 3281405 0.000 1070 2.03166 0.410 infinite 0.000

95-105 100 3.2 200 - 220 210 7.45 260-290 275 3.16 74 2.215 0.448 infinite 0.000 1261 1.92003 0.388 infinite 0.000

85-95 90 3.3 180 - 200 190 9.94 230-260 245 3.1 77 2.076 0.419 infinite 0.000 1683 1.8084 0.365 infinite 0.000

< 85 80 14.15 < 180 170 10.11 < 230 215 15.01 328 1.936 0.391 infinite 0.000 1712 1.69676 0.343 infinite 0.000

100 100 100 2320 Fat Dam from Sing. Axles = 0.377 16933 Fat Dam from Tand Axles = 0.137

Total Bottom-up Fatigue Damage due to single and

tandem axle loads =
0.377 + 0.137 = 0.514
Front Single Axles and Rear Tridem axles not considered for bottom-up analysis
Sum of CFD for BUC & TDC= 0.533
Fatigue Damage Analysis

Top-Down Cracking Fatigue Analysis for Night-time (6 hour) traffic and Negative Temperature Differential

Rear Tandem Axles Rear Tridem Axles

Rear Single Axles (Stess computed for 50% of axle load) (Stress computed for 33% of
axle load)
Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Allowable Fatigue Expected Flex Stress Ratio Allowable Fatigue
Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress Ratio Repetitions Damage Repetitions Stress (SR) Repetitions Damage
(ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (SR) (Ni) (ni/Ni) (ni) MPa (Ni) (ni/Ni)

328 2.544 0.514 413739 0.001 2403 2.57584 0.520 321836 0.007 0 2.49 0.503 659998 0.000

334 2.479 0.501 730855 0.000 2948 2.51148 0.507 543135 0.005 2845 2.4257 0.490 1284485 0.002
350 2.415 0.488 1456200 0.000 1595 2.44712 0.494 1013086 0.002 902 2.3613 0.477 2967035 0.000

229 2.351 0.475 3492437 0.000 349 2.38276 0.481 2190287 0.000 1867 2.2969 0.464 9170471 0.000

76 2.286 0.462 11573358 0.000 475 2.31839 0.468 6019786 0.000 2651 2.2326 0.451 52125404 0.000

50 2.222 0.449 infinite 0.000 176 2.25403 0.455 26223204 0.000 3149 2.1682 0.438 infinite 0.000

31 2.157 0.436 infinite 0.000 574 2.18967 0.442 infinite 0.000 4444 2.1039 0.425 infinite 0.000

70 2.093 0.423 infinite 0.000 725 2.12531 0.429 infinite 0.000 3482 2.0395 0.412 infinite 0.000

51 2.029 0.410 infinite 0.000 883 2.06094 0.416 infinite 0.000 1303 1.9751 0.399 infinite 0.000

61 1.964 0.397 infinite 0.000 1041 1.99658 0.403 infinite 0.000 828 1.9108 0.386 infinite 0.000

63 1.900 0.384 infinite 0.000 1389 1.93222 0.390 infinite 0.000 813 1.8464 0.373 infinite 0.000

271 1.836 0.371 infinite 0.000 1412 1.86786 0.377 infinite 0.000 3935 1.782 0.360 infinite 0.000

1914 Fat Dam from Sing. Axles = 0.002 13970 Fat Dam from Tand Axles = 0.015 26217 Fat Dam from Tridem Axles = 0.003

Total Top-Down Fatigue Damage = 0.002 + 0.015 + 0.003 = 0.019

DESIGN IS SAFE SINCE SUM OF CFD FOR BUC AND TDC< OR EQ.1