Kisse Project 2

7/30/2019 Kisse Project 2

1/35

PROJECT TITLE:UPGRADING OF AN EARTH ROADTO GRAVEL ROAD

CASE STUDY: KINONDONI MAKABURINI BURUNDI RNAME:

STEPHEN KISSE

ADM NO: 100101P7295

COURSE: ORDINARY DIPLOMA IN BUILDING AND CIVENGINEERING


2/35

INTRODUCTION:

Burundi Road is an Earth Road, located in Dar esalaam city at kinondoni District along Kinondonroad.From junction of Kinondoni Road and Ali HaMwinyi Road,Burundi Road are second Road in Rhand side a long Kinondoni Road and From KinonMakaburini station are second Road in left hand


3/35

DIRECTION OF BURUNDI ROAD


4/35

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Poor surface condition of Burundi road due to difdefect like pot hole, corrugation and other on a Rsurface reduces efficiency performance of vehictime goes the problem become serious as resultroad user not be comfortable when using it.


5/35

Pot hole on the road surface


6/35

OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT:

To design gravel Road at Burundi Road


7/35

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE

Determine soil test Determine traffic counting

Conducting survey data


8/35

SCOPE OF THE PROJECT

The scope of the project is to provide the designethickness of gravel Road of 800m at Burundi ro


9/35

EXPECPECTED OUTCOME :

The expected outcome of this project to improveroad to gravel Road.


10/35

METHODOLOGY:

Literature review Data collection

Survey data

Laboratory test

Traffic count

Rainfall intensity

Data analysis


11/35

LITERATURE REVIEW

GRAVEL ROADGravel road are the road that are constructed bgravel or crushed stone material to carry the hetraffic up to 100ADT(average daily traffic). Conssuperior as compared to an earth road. The camgravel road is 1:25 to 1:30.There are no specificthe material. Rounded stones and river gravel arpreferable as there is poor interlocking.


12/35

PROCEDURE OF CONSTRUCTION GRAVROAD

Material survey- Gravel to be used for the construction is stacked along

the sides of the proposed road.Moisture content W= (M2 M3)/ (M3 M1)*100%

Plastic index =liquid limit plastic limitLocation and dimensioning- marking road dimension and Width of the road

Range 3.5m to 5m and compaction.Preparation of subgradePavement construction crushed gravel aggregates are placed carefully in tto avoid segregation.0pening to traffic A few days after the final rolling and drying out, the roadto the traffic


13/35

FACTOR INFLUENCING SELECTION OF BASE COURSE AND SURFACINGDEPENDS

Amount of trafficType of traffic

Nature of sub grade soil and drainage condition

Availability of construction material

Climatic condition

Equipment available

Position of underground water table

Time available for completing the project


14/35

GENERAL FACTORS THAT CAUSES DEFECTS

Traffic volume -due to increasing number of vehusing the road

Within the designed period, hence the failure roa

Sub grade material when material is not suitabconstruction of

Road, absolute the road can fail for short Period o Water on the road surface due to poor design o

camber, during Heavy rainfall there is overflow oon the road surface.

Construction practice when there is no good

supervision during construction the road, Hence


15/35

STRENGH OF SUB GRADE SOIL

The strength of sub grade soil is measured by Cabearing ratio(CBR).CBR is normally a measure ostrength of the soil, required to take simple test taking sample of soil about 1m from the ground surface, sub grade sample are taken at interval

along chain age.

CBR value (in %) =P(100/13.2)

CBR value (in %) = P(100/20)

Where P is Plun er force in KN at 2.5mm and 5


16/35

TRAFFIC COUNTING

Traffic account is a system of accounting vehiclpassing on a road. During account vehicle you ccategories vehicle according to the weight of anindividual vehicle that is imposed on the road. bconducting by measure the standard of vehicle pon a road.

Average Daily Traffic(ADT) =(total number of vpassing for 7 day)/(7 day)

Equivalent standard axle(ESA)= (load/8.16)4.55 tim

of vehicle


17/35

DATA COLLECTION

Data collection required are:

Survey data

Traffic counting

Rainfall intensity

Laboratory Soil Test

Sieve analysiscompaction test

CBR Test

Atterberg test


18/35

SURVEY DATA

CHAINAGE BS IS FS RISE FALL

1.685

1.530 0.155

1.620 0.09

0+125 1.751 0.131

1.521 0.073

1.678 0.157

1.866 0.188

1.232 1.602

1.563 0.331

1.587 0.024


19/35

SURVEY DATA

CHAINAGE BS IS FS RISE FALL

1.342 1.523 0.055

1.751 0.409

1.756 0.005

0+500 1.653 0.103

1.564 0.089

1.882 0.318

1.702 0.18

1.541 1.625

1.605 0.064

1.625 0.02


20/35

LONGITUDINAL SECTION


21/35

SIEVE ANALYSIS RESULTS

Bs test sieve Mass ofpan +soil

MassRetained

MassRetainedcorrection

%retained

Total %passing

Mass of pan 229.22mm - - - - 1001.18mm 236.7 7.5 7.6 2.8 97.2

600micro 279.4 50.2 50.7 18.8 78.4425micro 279.4 47.7 48.2 17.9 60.5300micro 260.5 31.3 31.6 11.7 48.8212micro 251.3 22.1 22.3 8.4 40.4150micro 246.8 17.6 17.8 6.6 33.863micro 246.4 17.2 17.4 6.4 27.4Passing - 73.4 17.1 27.4 0

Total - 267 269.7 100 0


22/35

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTS FOR DESIGN

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

Pit No: 1 Pit No: 2 Pit No: 3

Atterbergs limit

Liquid limit 31 29 30.5

Plastic limit 17 16 14

Plastic index 14 13 12

Compaction test

MDD(kg/m3) 1908 1945 1992

OMC(%) 7.8 8.2 7.5

CBR test

4.5kg/5layer/62blows

8 10 9

4.5kg/5layer/30blows

3 4 8


23/35

TRAFFIC COUNTCar Pick up

& vansLightlorriesunder 5tons

Busesunder25 seats

Mediumlorriesover 5tons

Heavylorries

Veryheavylorries

Busoveseat

17.12.2012

89 12 2 3 0 0 0 0

18.12.2012

96 15 3 5 0 0 0 0

19.12.2012

102 9 5 2 2 0 0 0

2.1.201

3

88 20 2 3 0 0 0 0

3.1.2012

98 22 7 3 0 0 0 0

4.1.2013

110 25 0 5 0 0 0 0

5.1.2013

92 15 6 3 2 2 0 0

7.1.2013

87 27 5 2 2 0 0 1


24/35

RAINFALL INTENSITY

- 15

MIN

- 1 HR 2

HRS

3 HRS 6 HRS 12

HRS H

2 YRS 92.08 65.04 42.78 23.66 16.62 9.50 4.99

5 YRS 117.4

8

84.18 57.02 31.61 21.92 12.77 7.49

10

YRS

134.3

2

96.84 66.44 36.87 25.42 14.93 7.91

25

YRS

155.6

0

112.8

4

78.35 43.52 29.85 17.67 9.37

50

YRS

171.4

0

124.7

2

87.19 48.45 33.13 19.70 10.46

100

YRS

187.0

8

136.5

0

95.96 53.34 36.39 21.71 11.54


25/35

RAINFALL CURVE


26/35

GRAPH OF SIEVE


27/35

GRAPH OF ATTERBEG


28/35

GRAPH OF COMPACTION


29/35

DATA ANALYSIS FOR SOILLABORATORY TEST

Classification of soil

according to the data are collected,

From AASHTO SOIL CLASSIFICATION

Group A-2, A-2-6

Usual type of significant

Constituent material = silty or clayey grand sand

General rating as subgrade = Fair to poor


30/35

CALCULATION OF VEHICLE

tones Mid point Equivalent

factor(L/8.2)4.5

Number of

vehicles

Number of

axle

N

s

3-5 4 0.0395 144 288 1

5-7 6 0.2452 6 12 2

Total 150 300 1


31/35

DATA ANALYSIS FOR TRAFFICCOUNTING Determination of CESAL

n= design life =3%r= growth rate= 6% =0.06

Total number of commercial vehicle =14.3184 Total number of standard axle per day = Total number of standa

axle/Number of days

= 14.3184/7

=2.045485714

CESAL =365*2.04585714*(1+0.06)3 -1

0.06

CESAL = 237731.2982

CESAL = 0.24*106

According to (Pavement design manual 199traffic load class for CESAL

I obtained is 0.234*10

6

is TLC 05


32/35

Calculation of finding CBRdesign

CBR Result

PIT No 1 = 4

PIT No 2 = 6

PIT No 3 = 8

n =3,d =0.1*(n-1)

d=0.1*(3-1)

d=0.2


33/35

DESIGN CBR

CBR(%)8

6

4

2

1 2 3 4 5TEST NUMBER

= 4%


34/35

DESIGN OF THICKNESS

According to the strength of CBR required by mapavement design is 15%.

But l found that CBR is 4%,improvement ofsubgrade is required.

Also according to the pavement and manual dematerial(1999).

The thickness layer require according to the daabove

150mm thick G80 CBR base course.

150mm thick G45 sub base course.


35/35

REFERENCE;

Ministry of work Tanzania (1999) Pavement Mateand Design Manual.

Graham E. Barnes (2000) Soil Mechanics (PrincipPractices)

Central material laboratory manual(2000)Tanzannational road agency

S.K.Khanna and C.E.G.Justo (1991) Highway eng(7th edition) Nem Chand and Bros, India

Dares salaam institute of technology (25th Feb, 1Manual for Traffic, Transportation and Highway

Engineering Book11-volume 2&3

Documents

Kisse Project 2