Chapter 3
Methodology
3.1 General
Airport pavement can be designed using many methods out of these available methods; In this
study “United State of America Practice” method used to develop a program on airport pavement
design.
3.2 Methods for Airport Pavement Design
Following methods are available to design the airport pavement:
Ø Canadian practice Method
Ø French practice Method
Ø United Kingdom Practice Method
Ø United State of America practice Method
Ø Layered Elastic Design, Federal Aviation Administration (LEDFAA)
Some other methods are also available but are not included here as this is beyond the scope of
this study.
3.2.1 Canadian Practice Method
Transport Canada practice method is the one of the method which is use for the design and
evaluation of airport pavements. Further details are available in Transport Canada’s technical
32
manual series. The practices described have evolved from Transport Canada’s experience as the
operator of all major civil airports in Canada. Most airport sites in Canada are subjected to
seasonal frost penetration and the design and evaluation practices described are oriented to this
type of environment. The practices described do not apply to pavements constructed to
permafrost regions where special design considerations are required. The practiced outlined do
not cover several topics which are associated with and essential to the design of pavement
structure. Included in this category are pre-engineering studies such as soils, materials and
topographic surveys, and design considerations such as pavement embankment stability and
drainage. It should also be noted that the design of pavement structures is often greatly
influenced by considerations related to cost, construction feasibility and airport operation. This
method is too confusing and it’s not easily understandable.
3.2.2 French Practice Method
In this method, different graph are used to obtain airport pavement thickness. This method is
totally based on the graph. There are different graph are available for the different type of
aircraft. Pavement thickness for any particular type of aircraft is determined from that aircraft’s
graph. Graphs are too confusing and are not easily understandable.
3.2.3. United Kingdom Practice Method
In this method it is possible to design unlimited operational use by a given aircraft taking into
account the loading resulting from interaction of adjacent landing gear wheel assemblies where
applicable. The aircraft is designed “The Design Aircraft” for the pavement. The support
strength classification of pavement is represented by the design aircraft’s pavement classification
number identifying its loading severity. All other aircraft ranked by the United Kingdom
Standards as less severe may anticipate unlimited use of the pavement through the final decision
rests with the aerodrome authority.
This method is to follow the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) ACN/PCN
reporting method for aircraft pavements. The critical aircraft is identified as the one which
33
imposes a severity of loading condition closest to the maximum permitted on a given pavement
for unlimited operational use. Using the critical aircraft’s ACN individual aerodrome authorities
decide on the PCN to be published for the pavement concerned.
Through not revealed by the ICAO ACN/PCN reporting method, when interaction between
adjacent landing gear wheel assemblies affects the level of loading imposed by an aircraft,
United Kingdom authorities may impose restrictions on operations by a mass limitations or a
reduction in the number of permitted movements. This is unlikely to occur, with aircraft
currently in operational use except where subgrade support values are poor.
3.2.4 United State of America practice Method
The United States Federal Aviation Administration method of designing and reporting airport
pavement strength is in terms of gross aircraft weight for each type of loading gear. This permits
the evaluation of a pavement with regard to its ability to support the various types and weights of
aircraft. Comparison between the pavement strength (reported as gross weight for aircraft
equipped with single wheel, dual wheel and dual tandem wheel undercarriages) and the actual
gross weight of a specific aircraft will establish the pavement’s ability to accommodate the
aircraft. In 1978 the United State Federal Aviation Administration adopted the California
Bearing Ratio (CBR) method of flexible pavement design, edge loading assumption for the
design of rigid pavements and Unified Soil Classification System. This chapter presents a
detailed outline of current procedures and criteria which the United States Federal Aviation
Administration has found necessary to follow in pavement design and in conducting a pavement
strength evaluation.
3.2.5 Layered Elastic Design, Federal Aviation Administration (LEDFAA)
The layered elastic method was introduced into regular airfield design practice in the mid-1990’s
with the release of the computer program LEDFAA (Layered Elastic Design, Federal Aviation
Administration) and also the Australian-developed APSDS (Airport Pavement Structural Design
System), (Federal Aviation Administration, 1995) and (Rickards, 1994, Wardle and Rodway,
34
1998) respectively. LEDFAA is now an FAA standard design method and is used in parallel with
FAA’s conventional method. The new tools facilitated the treatment of bound layers and
eliminated the need for the ‘layer equivalency’ concept. Also, because the effects of the actual
aircraft wheel configurations and loads of all aircraft in the design mix could now be quickly
computed, the concepts of ‘equivalent single wheel load’ and ‘design aircraft’ were no longer
needed. In the case of APSDS, as described more fully below, its method for dealing with
aircraft wander meant that the ‘pass-to-coverage ratio’ was not required.
3.3 Selection of Method for Work
In this study United State of America Practice method has been adopted because this method is
suitable and all parameter related to airport pavement are considering in that method.
· Identification of available methods
· Through study of methods
Selection of Design
· Selection of method concerned
Method
· Coefficient interpolation according to
Coefficient interpolation language compatibility
· Input files
Program Development · Coding
· Linking
Conclusion
Scope of future work
Figure 3.1 Frame Work of Methodology
In this chapter united state of America practice method is explained briefly.
35
3.4 United State of America Practice Method
The United States Federal Aviation Administration method of designing and reporting airport
pavement strength is in terms of gross aircraft weight for each type of landing gear. These permit
the evaluation of a pavement with regard to its ability to support the various types and weight of
aircraft. Comparison between the pavement strength and the actual gross weight of a specific
aircraft will establish the pavement’s ability to accommodate the aircraft. In 1978 the United
States Federal Aviation Administration adopted the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) method of
flexible pavement design, edge loading assumption for the design of rigid pavements and the
Unified Soil Classification System. This section presents a detailed outline of current procedures
and criteria which the United States Federal Aviation Administration has found necessary to
follow in pavement design.
3.4.1 Determination of Design Aircraft
The forecast of annual departures by aircraft type will result in a list of a number of different
aircraft. The design aircraft should be selected on the basis of the one requiring the greatest
pavement thickness. Each aircraft type in the forecast should be checked to determine the
pavement thickness required by using the appropriate design curve with the forecast number of
annual departures for that aircraft. The aircraft type which produces the greatest pavement
thickness is the design aircraft. The design aircraft is not necessarily the heaviest aircraft in the
forecast.
3.4.2 Determination of Equivalent Annual Departures
Since the traffic forecast is a mixture of a variety of aircraft having different landing gear types
and different weights, the effects of all traffic must be accounted for in terms of the design
aircraft. First, all aircraft must be converted to the same landing gear type as the design aircraft.
The following conversion factors should be used to convert from one landing gear type to
another:
36
Table 3.1 Conversion Factors to Convert From One Landing Gear Type to Another
To Convert From To Multiply Departures By
Single Wheel Dual Wheel 0.8
Single Wheel Dual Tandem 0.5
Dual Wheel Dual Tandem 0.6
Double Dual Tandem Dual Tandem 1.0
Dual Tandem Single Wheel 2.0
Dual Tandem Dual Wheel 1.7
Dual Wheel Single Wheel 1.3
Double Dual Tandem Dual Wheel 1.7
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No. 3-147)
Secondly, after the aircraft have been grouped into the same landing gear configuration, the
conversion to equivalent annual departures of the design aircraft should be determined by the
following formula:
Log R 1 = Log R 2 ´
W2
W1
Where R1 = Equivalent annual departures by the design aircraft
R2 = Annual departures expressed in design aircraft landing gear
W1 = Wheel load of the design aircraft
W2 = Wheel load of the aircraft in question
For this computation 95 per cent of the gross weight of the aircraft is assumed to be carried by
the main landing gears. Wide body aircraft require special attention in this calculation. The
procedure discussed above is relative ratings which compress different aircraft to a common
design aircraft. Since wide body aircraft have radically different landing gear assemblies than
other aircraft, special considerations are needed to maintain the relative effects. This is done by
treating each wide body as a 300 000 lb (136 100 kg) dual tandem aircraft when computing
equivalent annual departure. This should be done in every instance even when the design aircraft
is a wide body. After the equivalent annual departures are determined, the design should proceed
37
using the appropriate design curve for the design aircraft. For example, if a wide body is the
design aircraft all equivalent departures should be calculated as described above, then the design
curve for the wide body should be used with the calculated equivalent annual departures.
3.4.3 Example for Determination of Equivalent Annual Departure and Design
Aircraft
Assume an airport pavement is to be designed for the following forecast traffic
Table 3.2 Example for Determination of Design Aircraft
Maximum Take-Off
Forecast Annual
Aircraft Gear Type Weight
Departures
(Lb) (Kg)
727-100 Dual 3760 160,000 (72,600)
727-200 Dual 9080 190,000 (86,500)
707-320B Dual Tandem 3050 327,000 (148,500)
DC-9-30 Dual 5800 108,000 (49,000)
CV-880 Dual Tandem 400 184,000 (83,948)
737-200 Dual 2650 115,500 (52,440)
L-1011-100 Dual Tandem 1710 450,000 (204,120)
747-100 Double Dual 85 700,000 (317,800)
Tandem
Ø Determine Design Aircraft
A pavement thickness is determined for each aircraft in the forecast using the appropriate design
curves. In this example the 727—200 requires the greatest pavement thickness and is thus the
design aircraft.
38
Ø Group Forecast Traffic Into Landing Gear of Design Aircraft
In this example the design aircraft is equipped with a dual wheel landing gear so all traffic must
be grouped into the dual wheel configuration.
Ø Convert Aircraft To Equivalent Annual Departures of the Design Aircraft
After the aircraft mixture has been grouped into a common landing gear configuration, the
equivalent annual departures of the design aircraft can be calculated.
Wheel loads for wide body aircraft will be token as the wheel load for a 300 000 lb (136 100 kg)
aircraft for equivalent annual departure calculations.
Table 3.3 Calculations for Equivalent Annual Departures
For this example the pavement would be designed for 16 000 annual departures of a dual wheel
aircraft weighing 190 500 lb (86 500 kg). The design should, however, provide for the heaviest
aircraft in the traffic mixture when considering depth of compaction, thickness of asphalt
surface, drainage structures, etc.
39
3.4.4 Flexible Pavement Design
Flexib1e pavements consist of a bituminous wearing surface placed on a base course and, when
required by subgrade conditions, a sub-base. The entire flexible pavement structure is ultimately
supported by the subgrade. Definitions of the function of the various components are given in the
following paragraphs. For some aircraft the base and sub-base have to be constructed of
stabilized materials.
Use of the design curves for flexible pavements requires a CBR value for the subgrade material,
a CBR value for the sub-base material, the gloss weight of the design aircraft, and the number of
annual, departures of the design aircraft. The design curves presented in Figures 3.2 to 3.10
indicates the total pavement thickness required and the thickness of bituminous surfacing. Figure
3.10 indicates the minimum thickness of base course for given total pavement thicknesses and
CBR values. For annual departures in excess of 25 000 the total pavement thickness should be
increased in accordance with Table 3.4, the bituminous surfacing increased by 1 inch.
40
Figure 3.2 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, Single Wheel Gear
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-150)
41
Figure 3.3 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, Dual Wheel Gear
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-151)
42
Figure 3.4 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, Dual Tandem Gear
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-152)
43
Figure 3.5 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, B747-100, SR, 200B, C, F
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-153)
44
Figure 3.6 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, DC10-10, 10CF
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-155)
45
Figure 3.7 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, B747-SP
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-154)
46
Figure 3.8 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, DC10-30, 30CF, 40, 40CF
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-156)
47
Figure 3.9 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, L-1011, 100
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-157)
48
Figure 3.10 Flexible Pavement Design Curve for Critical Areas, L-1011-100, 200
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-158)
49
Figure 3.11 Minimum Base Course Thickness Requirements
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-159)
50
3.4.5 Critical and Non-Critical Areas
The design curves, Figures 3.1 to 3.9, are used to determine the total critical pavement thickness,
T and the surface course thickness requirements. The 0.9T factor for the non-critical pavement
applies to the base and sub-base courses; the surface course thickness is as noted on the design
curves. For the variable section of the transition section and thinned edge, the reduction applies
only to the base course. For fractions of an inch of 0.5 or more, use the next higher whole
number; for less than 0.5, use the next lower number.
3.4.6 High Traffic Volume
There are a number of airports which experience traffic intensities in excess of those indicated on
the design curves. In these situation pavements maintenance is difficult and costly at high
activity airports due to traffic intensity and the potential for aircraft delays. Unfortunately, little
information exists on the performance of airport pavements under high traffic intensities except
for the experience gained through observation through observation of in-service pavements.
Ø Foundation The foundation for the pavement provides the ultimate support to the structure.
Every effort should be made to provide a stable foundation as problems arising later from an
inadequate foundation cannot be practicably corrected after the pavement is constructed. The
use of stabilized sub base will aid greatly in providing a uniform, stable foundation.
Ø Thickness Pavements subjected to traffic intensities greater than the 25,000 annual departure
level shown on the design curves will require more thickness to accommodate the traffic
volume. Additional thickness can be provided by increasing the pavement thickness in
accordance with Table 3.4.
51
Table 3.4 Pavement Thickness for High Departure Level
Annual Departure Level Percentage of 25,000 Departure Thickness
50,000 104
100,000 108
150,000 110
200,000 112
(Source: Aerodrome Design Manual (Part-3, Pavements, Second Edition, 1983) Page No.3-183)
The values given in Table 3.4 are based on extrapolations of research data and observations of
in-service pavements. Table 3.4 was developed assuming a logarithmic relationship between
percentage of thickness and departures.
3.4.7 Design Example for Flexible Pavement Design
As an example of the use of the design curves, assume a flexible pavement is to be designed for a
dual gear aircraft having a gross mass of 75,000 lb (34,000 kg) and 6,000 annual equivalent
departures of the design aircraft. Design CBR values for the sub-base and subgrade are 20 and 6,
respectively.
3.4.7.1 Total Pavement Thickness
The total pavement thickness required is determined from Figure 3.3. Enter the upper abscissa
with the subgrade CBR value, 6. Project vertically downward to the gross mass of the design
aircraft, 75 000 lb (34 000 kg). At the point of intersection of the vertical projection and the
aircraft gross weight, make a horizontal projection to the equivalent annual departures, 6000.
From the point of intersection of the horizontal projection and the annual, departure level, make
a vertical projection down to the lower abscissa and read the total pavement thickness; in this
example - 23 inch.
52
3.4.7.2 Thickness of Sub-Base Course
The thickness of the sub-base course is determined in a manner similar to the total pavement
thickness. Using Figure 3.3 enter the upper abscissa with the design CBR value for the sub-base,
20. The chart is used in the same manner as described in previous paragraph, i.e., vertical
projection to aircraft gross weight, horizontal projection to annual departures, and vertical
projection to lower abscissa. In this example the thickness obtained 9.2 inch. This means that the
combined thickness of bituminous surface and base course needed over a 20 CBR sub-base is 9.2
inch, thus having a sub-base thickness of 23 – 9.2 = 13.8 inch.
3.4.7.3. Thickness of Bituminous Surface
As indicated by the Note in Figure 3.3, the thickness of bituminous surface for critical areas is 4
inch and for non-critical, 3 inch.
3.4.7.4. Thickness of Base Course
The thickness of base course can be computed by subtracting the thickness of bituminous surface
from the combined thickness of surface and base determined in 3.3.8.2 above; in this example
9.2 - 4.0 = 5.2 inch of base course. The thickness of base course thus calculated should be
compared with the minimum base course thickness required as shown in Figure 3.11. Note that
the minimum base course thickness is 6.9 inch for critical areas. Enter the left ordinate of Figure
3.11 with the total pavement thickness as determined in 3.3.8.1 above, in this example - 23 inch.
Make a horizontal projection to the subgrade CBR line in this example, 6. From the intersection
of the horizontal projection and the subgrade CBR line, make a vertical projection down to the
lower abscissa and read the minimum base course thickness, in this example the minimum
thickness of base coarse 6.9 inch would be required. The extra thickness of base required by
Figure 3.11 as opposed to the earlier calculation is taken out of the sub-base thickness not added
to the total pavement thickness; in this example 13.8 – 1.7 = 12.1 inch.
53
3.4.7.5 Thickness of Non-Critical Areas
The total pavement thickness for non critical areas is obtained by taking 0.9 of the critical
pavement base and sub-base thickness plus the required bituminous surface thickness given on
the design charts. For the thinned edge portion of the critical and non-critical pavements, the
0.7T factor applies only to the base course because the sub-base should allow for transverse
drainage.
3.4.7.6 Results
The thickness calculated in the above paragraphs should be rounded off to even increments. The
final design thicknesses for this example would be as follows:
Table 3.5 Final Design Thickness
Thickness Requirement
(Inch)
Bituminous Surface 4
Base Course 7
Sub-Base Course 12
Total Pavement Thickness 23
3.5 Summary
In this chapter the procedure of the “United State of America Practice” method is described. Also
an idea about the determination of the thickness of the airport pavement layers is given. A
computer program is developed to calculate the thickness of the pavement. In the next chapter a
detailed discussion about the same is given.
54
