CAUSES OF FAILURE AT EXPERIMENTAL BLENDED BASE ROAD IN

MOZAMBIQUE
Author
Dzimba, Moisés
moises.dzimba@gmail.com
Administração Nacional de Estradas – ANE, IP Maputo-Moçambique

1. Introduction
The geology of Mozambique in the southern zone is characterized by fine coastal soils also fine
river soils produced at lower Limpopo River basin, making it difficult to obtain aggregates for
road construction. Noted, the average haul transportation of conventional aggregates for the road
construction base or surface, from Maputo to Inhambane is around 500 km, being quite honorable.
Thus, several road solutions were developed throughout Mozambique for rural roads, financed by
development program, funded by government partnership to design technically and economically
viability construction solution using local materials in Low Volume Roads.

So, in Inhambane province was implemented two different base solution in a total length of 5.5
km and 6.0m wide road at N/C Agostinho Neto - Mutamba. The first 4.3km the base is composed
by blended red soil and plastic calcrete gravel in a ratio of 50:50. The remaining 1.2 km consists
of an armoured base. The total 5.5km length is surfaced by Otta and Slurry seal.

In 2017, monitoring sections were established on each type of base to evaluate the road
performance. Routine monitoring of these sections has been being carried out according to a
standard protocol developed for Mozambique by AfCAP. Along the routine monitoring evaluation
at 500 m LTTP section, failures have been observed such transversal, longitudinal, crocodiles’
cracks, deformations/shoving, and potholes, immediately after the construction, at blended base,
so a lot of repairs has been done to the road to maintain the design level of service.

The tests and analysis done at blended base in the 500m of LTPP section during the investigation,
have proved that moisture, high IP, and construction quality control problems contributed to
pavement failures, as laboratory tests in the designing stage and during the monitoring of the
blended base (plastic calcrete gravel and sand) presented good CBR results. Based on the results
of the evaluation, an opinion was issued on the use of a blended base of granular soils and plastic
calcrete gravel as an economical and durable road construction solution in Mozambique. Beside
the investigation into the pavement causes failures, there’s also goal of proposing a new
experimental solution ratio (red soil and calcrete gravel) garanty reducing IP, protecting the base
from moisture and improvement in quality control construction along 1km.

The study focusses on construction period, design process and performance of the blended base
material.

Keywords: Bleended Base, Failure, Causes, Performance, Experimental.

1
2. Research approach
2.1. Objectives
The main objective is to find out the causes that led to the failure at experimental blended base
road in Mozambique, at Inhambane Province though to monitoring of local sand and plastic
calcrete gravel blended base at rate of 50% each. To fulfil goal, 500m section were established to
evaluate the performance road according to the Guideline for the Monitoring of Experimental and
LTPP section in Mozambique Manual.

2.2. Methodology
The following methodology was proposed to fulfil the investigation:
• Design Review.
• Construction and Maintenance Information.
• Monitoring Session Data (Field and Laboratory Tests).
• Data analyses and results discussion.
The causes of the defects observed in the Blended base were investigated through a review and
collection of data from design reports, design assumptions, material tests and construction reports.
For monitoring proposed was used a Long-Term Pavement Performance – LTPP along 3 year
evaluating the sand and plastic calcrete gravel blended base. A 500 m long section of road was
defined with a width of 5.8m, divided into 25 different panels of 20 m each, of which 5 (A, B, C,
D, and E) were reserved for carrying out the main research tests such as: DCP, LWD, moisture
content, sampling of the soils constituting the base for further characterization and obtaining CBR
results. The remain 20 panels were dedicated for visual inspection, ruts measurement, roughness,
the nondestructive tests. The monitoring lasted approximately 3 consecutive years from 2017,
twice a year, divided into dry and rainy periods.

2.3. Background of the blended base road

The entire road N/C Agostinho-
Neto to Mutamba is 5.5 Km long
and 6.0m wide coated with Otta
Seal later reinforced with Slurry
Seal, so the road is divided in 2
different experimental base design
solution (Blended and Armoured
bases) and construction concluded
in 2015. The study is only
concerned to the blended which is
4.3 km long. According to Inception
Report, 2013, Phase 4 the proposed
sub-base is 300mm red sand Figure 1.: Location of the monitoring sections
compacted to a minimum of 95%
MDD Mod AASHTO and the base is 150mm plastic calcrete aggregate blended with red sand and
compacted to a minimum of 98% MDD Mod AASHTO, and subgrade are composed by existing
red sand material. Also, the road run in to embankment composed by existing material.Location
The constructed road is in Inhambane Province, at Maxixe District, connecting Agostinho Neto
Village and Mutamba area at N5 Lindela – Inhambane road junction. The GPS coordinates at the
start point at Agostinho Neto are: South: 24° 2'6.05"S and East: 35°16'41.41"E.

2
2.4.Climate
Inhambane is the wettest Province in Mozambique
with a large year-on-year seasonal rainfall and
precipitation days strong. The number of days of
precipitation is not trend. The coastal zone of
greatest rainfall has much longer (7 months),

Figure 2.: Rainfall by month

Figure 3.: Average temperature in Cumbana
unlike the interior drought, where the growing
season can be as short as 2 months, El Niño
events greatly reduce rainfall during the
season, while the La Niña events lead to an
increase in rainfall.

(https://fscluster.org/sites/default/files/documents/mozclimateanalysisl_pt.pdf)

2.5.Geometry
The carriageway width is 5.8m and the unpaved shoulder width is 0.1-0.5 m. The Blended Base is
composed by section around 2.4Km in flat terrain and remain 1.9Km in embankment.

2.6.Pavement Description
The surfacing is a single Otta Seal covered by slurry seal - With the calcrete Otta Seal aggregate
being obtained from Chacane and the sand being obtained from Inharrime, and it’s 5m wide. The
Blended Base is blending material of red sand and calcrete aggregates in 50:50 ratio and it’s 6m
wide, 150mm thickness, minimum CBR 40%, compacted at 95% Mod. AASHTO. According to
TRL reports and design, before the surfacing the base was primed with MC30 in the rate of 1.0
L/m2 and the shoulders was not surfaced. The pavement was designed by Transport Research
Laboratory (TRL) estimating future traffic loading design of 300vpd and considered 5 years circle
of life (Inception Reports for RRIP phase 4 2013).

10 – 13 mm Slurry Seal
Surfacing
20 - 40 mm Otta Seal
Road base 150 mm Blended Base
Subbase 300 mm local Red Sand
Roadbed >500 mm Local Marginal Material
Table 1.: Pavement Description (performance of the mechanically stabilized sand base paper)
2.7.Construction details
The experimental section was built from 2013 to 2015 by Max Construções contractor. The
construction works for the 4.3 km section of blended base were estimated in 127 197 USD per
Km and works were supervised by Stange Consultant. There was reported that one of the
construction challenges was related to the shortage of bitumen on site. Thus, the base was
uncovered for a long term, exposed to several and different weather conditions, reducing the
quality of the blended base.

3
 Length of Construction Exc. Rate Construction Cost per Cost per
Road name
section km cost MT MT (2013) cost USD km MT km USD
N/C A.Neto - Mutamba 4.3 16.408.406,19 30 546.947 7.759.014 127.197
Table 2.: Cost Construction
2.8.Maintenance
The road has deteriorated precariously requiring huge intervention shortly after its construction.
Cracks and deformations/Shoving emerged because of the poor performance of the pavement,
becoming the maintenance expensive. Activities such as base reconstruction were done to maintain
the level of service.

Routine Maintenance Historic

Year Contract Cost MT Contract Cost USD
2016 3,123,366.00 49,577.24
2017 1,854,048.00 29,429.33
2018 1,876,305.12 29,782.62
2019 2,134,269.84 33,877.30
2020 4,863,287.65 77,195.04
Fig. 5.: Depression/water pound Fig. 4.: Potholes and Crocodiles
Total 13,851,276.61 219,861.53 Cracks
Table 3.: Maintenance Costs a long 5 years

Period Maintenance Maintenance

Activities carried out
From To cost MTN/Km cost USD/ Km

Construction Baseline survey • Grass and bushes cutting 140.973 2.311

• Box culvert Cleaning
• Refill of unpaved borders with
mechanically stabilized soil
• Repair and soil cement stabilization
of the base
• Patching
Baseline 1st monitoring • Grass and bushes cutting 156.636 2.568
survey survey • Box culvert Cleaning
• Refill of unpaved borders with
mechanically stabilized soil
• Repair and soil cement stabilization
of the base
• Patching
st
1 monitoring nd
2 monitoring • Grass and bushes cutting 112.051 1.837
survey survey • Box culvert Cleaning
• Refill of unpaved borders with
mechanically stabilized soil
• Repair and soil cement stabilization
of the base
• Patching
Table 4.: Typical Maintenance and Costs

The recurrent failure of the pavement demanded high investments in routine maintenance. Five
years after the construction of the road, about 40% of the investment on construction has been
applied for routine maintenance to ensure a good level of service. As the road was designed for a

4
 life cycle of 5 years, it was supposed that during the 5 years only low values of routine maintenance
would be applied with grass cutting activities and small repairs. The value already applied in
routine maintenance, should be applied now for a periodic maintenance considering the life cycle
of the pavement that was considered of 5 years.

2.9.Traffic
According to the reports available the counted traffic was 150 VPD and for design propose was
consider 300VPD, there’s no estimate the equivalent traffic information available. Traffic count
carried out in (2017 and 2020) indicate that in 2017 traffic doubled, from 300 VPD considered in
the design to 634 VPD, in 2020 traffic was 1827 VPD, 6 times more than considered for the
pavement design. The road accommodates 99% of 2-axle vehicles under 3.5 tones.

3. Expected results
3.1. Monitoring Section
The monitoring section starts from CH 3+800 and ends at CH 4+300 for a total length of 500m,
GPS coordinates of CH 3+800, S: 24° 2'49.44"S and Et: 35°18'39.36"E.

3.2. Layout of monitoring

section
According to the Guideline
for the Monitoring of
Experimental and LTPP
section in Mozambique Fig. 6.: Layout of monitoring section
Manual, monitoring 500m
layout section was established at the road.

3.3.DCP tests
The DCP test allows to assess the mechanical performance of the pavement to find out the
pavement's loading capacity, tests were carried out in 3 monitoring survey in 2017, 2018 and 2020.
DNbase (mm/blow) DNsub-base (mm/blow) DSN800
Ch. Panel May Abr Fev Av. May Abr Fev Av. May Abr Fev Av.
2017 2018 2020 2017 2018 2020 2017 2018 2020
3+800 A 8.7 3.3 3.4 5.13 6.3 2.3 2.3 3,63 109 215 217 180
3+930 B 5.4 6.3 P* 5.85 11.7 6.9 P* 6,20 177 140 P* 159
4+050 C 5.7 5.2 7.4 6.10 4.9 3.1 3.0 3,67 148 175 161 161
4+170 D 4.3 7.8 4.1 5.40 3.9 3.7 2.0 3,20 228 179 234 214
4+290 E 3.6 5.3 2.8 3.90 3.9 3.1 1.5 2,83 150 203 280 211
Specification ≤4 ≤9 ≥73
Table 5.: DCP tests on the 500m section 2017, 2018 and 2020 (P* means patching)

3.4.Test Pit
3.4.1. In situ DCP tests
Tests were carried out in May 2017, in the first monitoring survey on extreme panels A and E,
before the test pit log to compare it with the laboratory tests output.

5
 Test Pit No. DNbase DNsub-base DSN800
TP1 8.7 6.3 109
TP2 5.3 3.1 203
Specification ≤4 ≤9 ≥73
Table 6.: DN values for pavement layers in the test pit

3.4.2. Layer density and moisture content

The in-situ moisture content was measured from blended base material samples taken to the
laboratory.
Test In situ Moisture Compaction test
Reference LEM Depth(m)
pit (%) MDD (kg/m3) OMC(%)
Blended Base 0-150 9,8 2030 9
401 - B Subbase 1 150-450 4,7 2010 9,8
Subgrade 450-800 3,4 1786 11
Blended Base 0 -150 7,4 2050 8,7
404 - B Subbase 2 150-300 4,9 1995 9,8
Subgrade 300-800 2,7 1808 9,3
Table 7.: Density and moisture content

The moistures of pit 1 and 2 in situ are high than OMC in pit
1, in contrast at the pit 2 the moisture is below the OMC of
the blended base.

3.4.3. Test pit log

On both pits, the characteristics of the pavement structure
are similar, differs only in moisture condition, for Pit 1 vary
from slightly wet at blended base and subgrade, wet at sub-
base, Pit 2 the moisture condition are dry to blended base,
sub-base and subgrade. The other characteristic are the same Fig. 7.: Surface at link place between
surfacing and blended base is wet
according to field measures and inspection, blended base is because at panel A.
150mm of thickness, colour blotched, consistency is loose
to medium dense, structure is granular blended, soil type is
medium gravel to coarse gravel, origin is calcrete talus
coarse aluvion and AASHTO soil classification is A-2-4.
Sub-base is 300mm of thickness, colour red, consistency is
loose to medium dense, structure is granular send, soil type
is medium gravel to coarse gravel, origin is sandy soils of
mixed origin and AASHTO soil classification is A-2-4.
Subgrade is infinite thickness, colour is brown blended,
consistency is loose to medium dense or medium dense,
structure is granular send, soil type is medium gravel to
coarse gravel, origin is Sandy soils of mixed origin and Fig. 8.: Dry blended base and subase at
AASHTO soil classification is A-3. panel E

6
 3.4.4. Base material properties
The results presented at table 8 for the blended material, according to TRH14, table 13, the material
from Test pit 1 with CBR 35@95% can be classified as G6 and material from Pit test 2 at panel E
with CBR 45@95 can be classified as G5 and the material are recommended as base material. The
tests confirmed that plasticity varies from moderately plastic to highly plastic of the blended base.
AASHTO T88 AASHTO T89-90 AASHTO T180 3-point CBR TMH 1
Test
% Passing sieve Atterberg limits MDD
Pit GM OMC % No. of blows 55
2.0 0.425 0.075 LL % PL % PI % (kg/m3)

TP1 76 62 16 1,13 35.2 19.7 15,6 2073 7,8 Dry density kg/m3 2137
CBR % soaked 35
TP2 81 71 18 1,07 29.4 18.3 11,1 2192 7,0 Dry density kg/m3 2170
CBR % soaked 45
Table 8.: Base material properties on Blended Base

3.4.5. Sub-base material properties

AASHTO T88 AASHTO T89-90 AASHTO T180 3-point CBR TMH 1
Test % Passing sieve Atterberg limits
Pit MDD OMC
GM LL No. of blows 55
2.0 0.425 0.075 PL % PI % (kg/m3) %
%
TP1 100 90 7 0,95 NP NP NP 2090 6,3 Dry density kg/m3 2011
CBR % soaked 22
3
TP2 99 92 10 0,96 NP NP NP 2103 7,7 Dry density kg/m 2016
CBR % soaked 41
Table 9.: Sub-base material properties

According to LVR – Final draft for Mozambique, for sub-base a minimal requirement of CBR is
30%@95% under the good drainage condition, observing the results TP1 material does not meet
the minimal requirement, although the TP2 material is a good for subbase, the CBR results is up
to 30%.

3.4.6. Subgrade material properties

AASHTO T88 AASHTO T89-90 AASHTO T180 3-point CBR TMH 1

Test % Passing sieve Atterberg limits

Pit MDD OMC
GM No. of blows 55
LL (kg/m3) %
2.0 0.425 0.075 PL % PI %
%

TP1 99 87 15 1,0 NP NP NP 2074 7,8 Dry density kg/m3 1849

CBR % soaked 26

TP2 100 94 8 0,98 NP NP NP 2080 8,5 Dry density kg/m3 2004

7
 AASHTO T88 AASHTO T89-90 AASHTO T180 3-point CBR TMH 1

Test % Passing sieve Atterberg limits

Pit MDD OMC
GM No. of blows 55
LL (kg/m3) %
2.0 0.425 0.075 PL % PI %
%

CBR % soaked 31

Table 10.: Subgrade material properties

The materials used for the subgrade are classified as SG1 class (Subgrade CBR classification for
structural design), (G6 on TRH 14), indicating relatively strong support for the pavement.

3.4.7. Particle Size Distribution

The PSD for the blended base and course material in each TP, compared with the specification
envelope below.

100 Sieve Analysis

80
% Passing (%)

60

40

20

0
0.075 0.75 7.5 75
Openning Sieve (mm)
TP1 Envelope Sup Envelope Inf

Fig. 10.: PSD for blended base in TP 2

Figure 13.: PSD for blended

Sieve base in TP 1
Analysis
100

80
% Passing (%)

60

40

20

0
0.075 0.75 7.5 75
Openning Sieve (mm)
TP1 Envelope Sup Envelope Inf

Fig.11.: Sieve Analysis for subbase course in TP 1

8
Considering envelope presented at Mozambique LVR manual is observed that particle size
analysis of the blended material in TP1 and TP2 is outside the envelope, so it may contribute to
poor pavement performance.

100 Sieve Analysis

80
% Passing (%)

60

40

20

0
0.075 0.75 7.5 75
Openning Sieve (mm)
TP1 Envelope Sup Envelope Inf

Fig. 12.: Sieve Analysis for subbase course in TP 1

100
Sieve Analysis
90
80
70
% Passing (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.075 0.75 7.5 75
Openning Sieve (mm)

TP1 Envelope Sup Envelope Inf

Fig. 13.: Sieve Analysis for sub-base course in TP 2

Same analysis done to the blended base at TP1 and TP2 is useful for the subbase material.

9
3.4.8. LWD Test
The pavement deformability
tests according to the
Guideline for Monitoring
Experimental Section and
LTPP using the LWD must
be performed on 20 non-
destructive test panels, it Fig. 14.: Points for LWD test
means, between the Legend: A, B, C, D, E (Destructive Panels), remaining Non-destructive Panel
destructive panels A - B, B- where LWD test were carried out.
C, C-D and D - E, however,
the existence patching on the
pavement done to repair the premature distress at road to maintain the level of service, allows only
tests on 22 of the 56 points previously marked for the tests, thus reducing the desired evaluation
field. Below is presented the summarised average values of deflections and EModuli to each point.

Force Def Emod. Force Def Emod Force Def Emod Force Def Emod
(kN) (ϕmm) (Mpa) (kN) (ϕmm) (Mpa) (kN) (ϕmm) (Mpa) (kN) (ϕmm) (Mpa)
Panels A to B Panels B to C Panels C to D Panels D to E
8,23 135,33 226,33 8,07 146,33 206,37 8,23 241,67 133,97 8,17 184,33 164,80
8,30 99,67 309,43 8,23 102,00 449,20 8,43 60,33 526,23 8,37 105,33 297,83
8,33 109,33 280,63 8,13 228,00 134,67 8,33 129,67 245,87 8,47 82,00 391,23
8,13 92,33 327,37 8,53 80,33 396,17 8,37 168,00 186,13 8,33 138,67 225,73
8,57 76,67 417,97 8,33 65,67 476,10 8,27 204,33 152,03 8,40 51,00 611,00
8,33 101,00 308,33 8,33 125,33 249,17 8,50 62,67 507,03 8,33 34,00 916,40
8,33 203,33 152,93 8,57 53,00 604,40 8,20 71,67 426,83
8,40 304,33 102,23 8,53 41,33 772,00 8,43 41,67 752,97
8,40 36,33 873,70 8,30 142,67 216,30
Max 304,33 417,97 228,00 476,10 241,67 873,70 184,33 916,40
Min 76,67 102,23 65,67 134,67 36,33 133,97 34,00 164,80
Table 11.: Subgrade material properties on Blended Base

4. Conclusions and discussion

4.1. Consideration into blended base road performance
4.1.1. DCP Test
• The DCP test provides essential information from an isolated point, however from the DCP
tests carried out in each monitoring survey session, was observed that the strength diagram
DCP always presents panel where the blended base is inadequate to absorb exposed or
designed loads.
• Observing the average DN values per panel during the 3-monitoring survey session for the
blended base, only panel E presents results below 4mm/blows recommended for the traffic
road design, the other do not meet the minimal requirements for traffic design according to
the LVR manual for Mozambique in table 8-23.
• The average DN values from the DCP test results for the subbase in all panels are below
9mm/blows, meeting the minimum requirements for the traffic of the project according to
the low volume road traffic manual for Mozambique stipulated in table 8-23.

10
 • The DCP structure number (DSN800) according to table 8-23 of the manual of low-traffic
roads to Mozambique, the average values of DSN800 are in all panels above 73%,
demonstrating a good performance on the subgrade.

4.1.2. Test Pit

• The pit test allowed a visual inspection of the aspect of the road structure and detailed
analysis from the collected sample for laboratory for the tests that allows to characterize
the pavement structure composition.
• The particle size analysis of blended material in both pits tests is outside of the envelope
recommended at Mozambique LVR manual, so it may contribute to the poor pavement
performance. A correction to the mix design should have been made to ensure minimum
requirements in the road design.

4.1.3. LWD test

• The biggest deflections were verified in panels A, B and C where are verified the main
premature defects, presenting the biggest patching areas.
• The best values of the deformability module were detected in panel E and D, sections with
minor defects and few repairs.
• From the analysis of the deflection results and the deformation module, the sections with
the greatest deflection 304,33 ϕmm and smallest deformability module are the ones that
demonstrated the greatest defects led to deeper repairs, in panels A, B and C fully covered
by patching. Panel E presents the best performance, confirmed by the overall smallest
deflection values 34,00 ϕmm and the largest deformability module 916,40MP.

4.2. Recommended solution for rehabilitation of blended base road

Found out that the blended base section failed, it is recommended the reconstruction following all
the requirement of experimental road sections over a short stretch of 1 km subdivided into 500m
on embankment and the remaining 500m on flat terrain. For the reconstruction to evaluated
blended base failure road is recommended to use a design method for upgrading and rehabilitation
(DCP – CBR method or DCP DN design method) according to LVR Manual, where is stated the
procedure at table 8-15 and 8-21. The DCP Design method provides a quickly, accurate, less cost
and non-destructive strength and thickness pavement measurement. The summarized step for
design and reconstruction is:
• Through the DCP-CBR or DCP DN method, the blended base must be redesigned,
assessing whether there is a need to correct the material rate of the mixture or any other
specific aspect of the material to ensure its perfect performance.
• Must be guaranteed that the implementation of the rehabilitation section must follow
national and international standard requirements for road experimental section
reconstruction with high quality standard and high-quality control to ensure the correct
performance of the pavement.

11
4.3. Conclusions
Taking into consideration of the observed parameters during the monitoring process, also
considering results from laboratory tests of the samples collected, conclusion about the causes of
failure can be divided into:
Design Period
The information related to the traffic, characteristics of the materials tested in the laboratory, with
the project values available on the road N / C Agostinho Neto - Mutamba concerning the blended
base, demonstrated that the solution can performance well if is controlled the in-situ moisture and
reducing the IP.
Construction Period (Contractor and Supervisor)
Of the main components for the success of the performance of the experimental section, the most
essential part is related to the construction, ensuring that whoever is going to execute an
experimental section must have any experience in similar works or have been trained before for
job. The Contractor and Supervisor must have highly trained personnel for investigation propose
to understand the sensitivity of carrying out an experimental works, because for success of the
experimental construction section is mandatory to follow the highest quality standards. So, not
observing high quality supervision, quality control and construction, there’s a risk of reproving a
good engineering solution due the bad performance caused by weak construction and supervising.
Monitoring Period
From the findings made through inspections, was observed that the defects in the roads were
mostly related to the performance of the blended base, that are related to poor construction quality
control, poor drainage of the pavement and significant traffic increase. The non-destructive tests
showed a poor similar performance of panels A, B and C, indicating the greatest failures due to
the weakness of load-bearing capacity, being the weakness caused by moisture and high value of
IP.
The results of laboratory tests presented material with CBR from 35 to 45, according to the LVR
manual, the blended base material can be considered good material for base construction for LVR.
In this case, within the 500m study section for performance evaluation, Panels D and E present
good results of DCP and LWD, conducting to reasonable performance, indicating that the poor
performance of the Blended Base in panels A, B and C is not only related only to the blended
materials.
Analysing the 3 components above, it can be concluded that the blended base failed not only
because of the performance of blended materials (sand and plastic calcrete aggregate) but also a
poor construction quality control, related to poor compaction, base exposed to different weather
condition long period, leading to the appearance of deformations contributing for a deficit drainage
of the pavement.

12
References

Guideline for Monitoring of Experimental and LTPP Sections in Mozambique. Maputo, ANE,
2016;
Visual Assessment TMH9/12, South Africa, Pretoria, 1985;
Measurement of Rut Depth of Pavement Surface using a Straightedge. American Society of
Technical Method, ASTM E 1703/E 1703M – 95 (2005);
STP 6. Measurement of in situ of soils by Dynamic Cone Penetrometer. Pretoria South Africa
1985;
Guideline for Soil and Rock Logging in South Africa, South Africa, 1990 (second impression
2002);
TRH 14, Guidelines for road construction materials, South Africa, Pretoria, 1985;
Targeted Interventions on Low Volume Rural Roads in Mozambique Phase 2 – final report, TRL,
2013.
Manual for Provision of Low Volume Roads in Mozambique. Maputo, 2016.
Paper, performance in mechanically stabilized sand base in Mozambique, Maputo, 2018.

13