Search

Overlay design must consider factors such as traffic load, soil characteristics, existing pavement condition, and planned changes to road design. This overlay calculation procedure is usually performed using technically recognized pavement design methods, such as the AASHTO 1993 (Guide for Design of Pavement Structure) calculation method. The research conducted is a method to determine the design algorithm of thick, layer added using asphalt coating on concrete roads based on AASHTO 1993 standards. The data used in this study were pavement design data and Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) deflection data. The cumulative value of traffic load used is 35,000,000 million and then calculated using lane distribution factors and directions, the resulting w18 value is 8,750,000 million, then the result of calculating the thickness of the plate to serve future traffic (Df) is 11.64 inches or 29.57 cm and the effective plate thickness value (Deff) is 9.45 inches or 24.01 cm, Factor A of converting concrete thickness into asphalt thickness is 1.93 inches or 4.91 cm, then the result of layer added thickness (Dol) is 4.24 inches or 10.77 cm. This design is influenced by Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) deflection data so that the calculation of the added layer thickness is analyzed at each station point (STA). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cakung-Cilincing Jakarta National Road Section has very rapid traffic load for rigid pavement. The purpose of this study are determining overlay thickness and choosing suitable method for implementation. AASHTO 1993 and AUSTROADS 2011 method are used in this study and using on Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) data. This study shows that value of Concrete Elasticity Modulus less than 3 million, then this rigid pavement is severely damaged. Based on AASHTO 1993 Method analysis, it needs 11 cm for flexible overlay and 12 cm for rigid overlay on lane 1 with 59% remaining life and lane 2 with 53% remaining life. AUSTROADS 2011 Methods use only FWD data and for overlay thickness determination is use new pavement analysis. Analysis using AUSTROADS 2011 Methods shows that flexible overlay requirement is 24 cm and rigid overlay requirement is 18.50 cm. Comparation between these two methods shows that AASHTO 1993 Method Analysis produce less overlay thickness than AUSTROADS 2011 Methods.

This study evaluates airfield pavements’ functional- and structural-condition to determine the most economical maintenance method. As a part of the analysis, Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for several runways, taxiways, and aprons has been determined by MicroPAVER. Structural evaluation of airport pavements has been performed by Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) test. Evaluation of Layer Moduli and Overlay Design (ELMOD) also determines the required overlay thickness based on the E-values, i.e. FWD data analysis. Damage analysis determines the time of repeated overlay application. In addition, functional parameters have been included to determine the time of functional maintenance. Maintenance and rehabilitation alternatives have been selected to develop different program strategies. Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) has been performed to determine the maintenance cost. Structural condition based maintenance cost is compared to functional condition based maintenance cost. Comparison shows that structural condition based approach yields cheaper maintenance strategies than functional condition based maintenance approach.