CHAPTER 1

PROBLEM STATEMENT
As Malaysias roads become more congested, the Works Ministry has the daunting tas
k of ensuring they are constantly in good condition and safe for motorists. Road
infrastructure development is generally synonymous with the overall growth of a
nation. Malaysia has had a tremendous increase in road mileage since the last 4
0 years, expedited by her independence. With the convenience of road development
comes issues that cause specific inconvenience to the people, namely poor road
condition during rainy seasons, traffic congestion and road accidents. During th
e rainy seasons, many areas will have potholes and other types of problems, crea
ting a dangerous condition and causing accidents as drivers react to avoid them.
1

Potholes, cracks, and other problems on roads and pavements can lead to accident
s. Road pavement shall be strong, smooth, rough, economical, and complying with
sanitary and hygiene requirements. These characteristics depend on the type and
structure of pavement, traffic volumes and driving speed, road significance as w
ell as materials used for road construction. The most important characteristics
of pavement are its strength, smoothness and roughness. When pavement is not str
ong enough, rutting or even breaching occurs, and rolling resistance increases c
onsiderably. Therefore, it is extremely important to design such road pavement s
tructure, which complies with the imposed requirements.
Successful chip seal construction depends on a combination of rational science a
nd qualitative judgment in the field. Success is usually measured by a lack of c
ustomer complaints that sometimes occur when loose aggregate chips come in conta
ct with windshields at high speed. Allowing traffic on a fresh chip seal too soo
n can result in windshield damage if the asphalt binder lacks sufficient strengt
h to resist dislodgement. Therefore, timing the removal of traffic control is a
key element in the success of any chip seal project. A desirable addition to the
technology would be a quantitative process that identifies when a chip seal is
ready for uncontrolled traffic.
2

In order to complete our project for BFC 3042, we are required to conduct a surv
ey on pavement condition to identify the damage which occurred and propose a sui
table pavement method work to local authority.
1.1
SCOPE
For this task we are required to conduct a survey on the pavement condition in t
he certain road, along 1kilometer. We have to do a few methods to complete this
survey. We had picked up the main road from Parit Jelutong. At the site survey,
we have to determine some categories of pavement distress and damage. From the d
ata obtained, we have to discuss and analyze the suitable method to regarding th
e condition.
1.2
AIM
We had survey a few roads in the radius of UTHM. We found that Parit Jelutong is
most suitable site that we chose to continue the project as it is nearby to UTH
M. The respective road had a few sort of damaged that easily can found on their
pavement due to transportation of oil palm material in and out from the particul
ar place.
1.3
METHOD
For the method of analyzation, we collect the data by filling the damage found i
nto the condition survey data sheet. We also did the sand patch method in order
to covers the determination of the average texture depth of paved surface sand t
o give the volume of voids. For the treatment, we use chip seal to assure that t
he damage occurred has been treat and the road will be use safe and smoothly.
3

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The movement of people and goods throughout the world is primarily dependent upo
n a transportation network consisting of roadways. Most, if not all, business ec
onomies, personal economies, and public economies are the result of this transpo
rtation system. Considering the high initial and annual cost of roadways and sin
ce each roadway serves many users, the only prudent owner of roadways is the pub
lic sector. Thus it is the discipline of civil engineering that manages the vast
network of roadways. The surface of these roadways, the pavement, must have suf
ficient smoothness to allow a reasonable speed of travel, as well as ensure the
safety of people and cargo. Additionally, once the pavement is in service, the e
conomies that depend upon it will be financially burdened if the pavement is tak
en out of service for repair or maintenance. Thus, pavements should be designed
to be long lasting with few maintenance needs.
The accomplishment of a successful pavement design depends upon several variable
s. The practice of pavement design is based on both engineering principles and e
xperience. Pavements were built long before computers, calculators, and even sli
de rules. Prior to more modern times, pavements were designed by trial-and-error
and commonsense methods, rather
4

than the more complicated methods being used currently. Even more modern methods
require a certain amount of experience and common sense. The most widely used m
ethods today are based on experiments with full-scale, in-service pavements that
were built and monitored to failure. Empirical information derived from these r
oad tests is the most common basis for current pavement design methods. More rec
ently, with the ever-expanding power of personal computers, more mathematically
based pavement design methods such as finite element analysis and refined elasti
c layer theory have been introduced. These methods require extensive training to
use and are not developed for the inexperienced. Types of pavements can be broa
dly categorized as rigid, flexible, or composite. The characteristics of these t
ypes are reviewed in the following articles.
RIGID PAVEMENT FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT COMPOSITE PAVEMENT (OVERLAYS)
In this literature review, we need to spend and focus over the aspect that invol
ving in pavement design criteria. It is centralized as three of analytical impor
tant prospect in this part of literature review for the Project gaining informat
ion as listed below;
PAVEMENT STRESS
DESIGN OF CHIP SEAL
TYPES OF PAVEMENT DISTR
ESS
Rigid pavement can be constructed with contraction joints, expansion joints, dow
elled joints, no joints, temperature steel, continuous reinforcing steel, or no
steel. Most generally, the construction requirements concerning these options ar
e carefully chosen by the owner or the public entity that will be responsible fo
r future maintenance of the pavement. The types of joints and the amount of stee
l used are chosen in concert as a strategy to control cracking in the concrete p
avement. Often, the owner specifies the construction requirements but requires t
he designer to take care of other details such as intersection jointing details
and the like. It is
5

imperative that a designer understand all of these design options and the role e
ach of these plays in concrete pavement performance.
Load transfer is the critical element at joints and cracks. In undo welled, unre
inforced pavements, any load transfer must be provided by aggregate interlock.
Source: Highway Engineering Handbook, 2nd edition
Aggregate interlock is lost when slabs contract and the joints or cracks open up
. Also, interlock is slowly destroyed by the movement of the concrete as traffic
passes over. Given large temperature variations and heavy trucks, aggregate int
erlock is ineffectual, and faulting is the primary result.
Where a long joint spacing is used and intermediate cracks are expected, steel r
einforcement is added to hold the cracks tightly closed (JRCP). This allows the
load transfer to be accomplished through aggregate interlock without the associa
ted problems described above. Contraction joints do not provide for expansion of
the pavement unless the same amount of contraction has already taken place. Thi
s contraction will initially be from shrinkage due to concrete curing. Later cha
nges in the pavement length are due to temperature changes. Where
6

fixed objects such as structures are placed in the pavement, the use of an expan
sion joint is warranted. Expansion joints should be used sparingly. The pavement
will be allowed to creep toward the expansion joint, thus opening the adjacent
contraction joints. This can cause movement in the adjacent contraction joints i
n excess of their design capabilities and result in premature failures.
This is showed, how the good implementation and idea given to review the overall
literature of Project Making Process with high intention of other fundamental i
dea in highway engineering.
2.1
PAVEMENT STRESS
Pavement Stress is considered to be under the flexible pavement. The basic idea
of pavement stress starting from the loading area and impact on the pavement. Ru
tting in asphalt pavement includes densification and shear flow of hot-mix aspha
lt, but the majority of severe instable rutting results from shear flow within t
he asphalt mixtures. In recent years, another type of surface distress called To
p-Down Cracking (TDC), which is usually found in longitudinal path, has become m
ore common in asphalt pavement, this is also considered as a shear-related failu
re. As a result, shear stress is believed to be one of the critical factors affe
cting pavements performance, and it is necessary to well understand shear stress
in asphalt pavements. To gain an accurate understanding of the effect of shear
stress on pavement performance, a laboratory method of applying tirepavement con
tact pressure is employed in this paper. The results are compared for differing
loading conditions. The effects of tire pressure and stress components in terms
of vertical and horizontal stress on shear stress are comprehensively investigat
ed by three-dimensional finite element method. In addition, the effects of aspha
lt layer thickness and interface conditions are also discussed.
7

Car loading is the most important aspect in order to effect the load distributio
n on pavement surface to the base. Rutting influenced by the load of car, and re
gularly happened on the mid of section in single road. We need to predict and un
derstand stress - strain distribution within the pavement structure as they rela
te to failure cracking and rutting.
In Flexible Pavement Stress Analysis, there are two (2) types of prediction stre
ss in pavement that occur. 1. Numerical Models 2. Ideal Models
Numerical Models Need model to compute deflections () an strains (). Num
rous mo

ls availabl
with iff
r
nt: Capabiliti
s Un
rlying assumptions Compl
xity Mat

rial information r
quir
m
nts I
al Mo
ls Pr
icts an Input Param
t
rs Str
ss

s Strains Static & ynamic loa s Mat
rial prop
rti
s Traffic Environm
nt
8

Availabl
Mo
ls in th
s
fi
l s of highway analysis that us
wi
ly in r
al sit

as b
low list
; o Multilay
r Elastic Th
ory o Finit
El
m
nt M
tho s o o o Vi
sco
lastic Th
ory (tim
an t
mp.-
p
n
nt b
havior) Dynamic Analysis (in
rtial

ff
cts) Th
rmal Mo
ls (t
mp
ratur
chang
)
But most wi
ly us
is; o R
asonabl
R
sults o Prop
rti
s R
lativ
ly Simpl
to
Obtain
Falling W
ight D
fl
ctom
t
r
Us

lastic th
ory to pr

at
with iff
r
nt mo ul

atch
s th
m
asur
. This
G
ophon
s D
fl
ction
9

ict th

fl
ction basin for th
giv
n loa . Th
n it
r

fl
ction basin m
configurations until th
calculat

Proc
ss using th
tools; Small trail
r Dropping W
ight
Basin

This Pav
m
nt Str
ss g
n
rat
by th
th
ory of Multilay
r Elastic Th
ory. An a

f
w assumptions w
r
taking part of th
analysis to mak
sur
that will b
r
as
onabl
an practic
to b
on
. As r
sult, a graph g
n
rat
by th
fin ings in t
h
analysis as th
ory assumption ha ma
b
for
th
analysis. Th
figur
of fin
ing as show
b
low.
Figur
G
n
rating Fin ing from Analysis Th
ory Sourc
: Dr. Christos Drakos, Univ

rsity of Flori a
10

Graph: On
-lay
r Solutions (Fost
r & Ahlvin 1954) Sh
ar str
ss
s u
to circular
loa ing. Sourc
: Dr. Christos Drakos, Univ
rsity of Flori a
Asphalt concr
t
pav
m
nt, also r
f
rr
to as fl
xibl
pav
m
nt, is a mixtur
o
f san , aggr
gat
, a fill
r mat
rial, an asphalt c
m
nt combin
in a controll

proc
ss, plac
, an compact
. Th
fill
r mat
rial can rang
from quarry crus
hing ust an asphalt-plant bag hous
fin
s to woo fib
rs (c
llulos
). Th
r
ar

many a itiv
s that can b
us
in asphalt concr
t
mix
s to
ncourag
thick
r
c
m
nt coatings, mor

lastic mix
s, stiff
r mix
s, an l
ss t
mp
ratur
-s
nsit
iv
mix
s. Fl
xibl
pav
m
nts can b
of a typ
construct
on a pr
par
sub gra

, which is call
full-
pth asphalt concr
t
pav
m
nt (FDACP), or of a typ
b
uilt on an untr
at
granular bas
, which is not as car
fully i
ntifi
by th

in ustry but is r
f
rr
to h
r
in as

p-str
ngth asphalt concr
t
pav
m
nt (D
SACP).
11

2.2
DESIGN OF CHIP SEAL
Th
r
ar
a f
w qu
stions about th
Chip S
al that play aroun th
fi
l s of con
struction
sp
cially among th
p
opl
who liv
ly involv
in th
in ustry of roa
maint
nanc
. To clarify th
qu
stions issu
that
m
rg
in t
rms of right kno
wl
g
an fun am
ntal of Chip S
al, th
Maint
nanc
T
chnical A visory Gui
(M
TAG) US, w
r
using to k

p maintain an bri
fly
xplain th
Chip S
al D
sign.
2.3
MAINTENANCE TECHNICAL ADVISORY GUIDE (MTAG)
2.3.1 Chip S
al from MTAG R
vi
w.
Application of asphalt bin
r on
xisting pav
m
nt follow
by a lay
r of aggr
g
at
chips. Th
tr
atm
nt is th
n roll
to
mb
th
aggr
gat
into th
bin
r.
o P
rformanc
Typical tr
atm
nt lif
: 5 to 10 y
ars Function of climat
,
xisting
pav
m
nt con ition, traffic, typ
of chip s
al o Av
rag
cost $2.50 to $5.00/y 2
(
p
n ing on oil pric
)
12

Th
chip s
al practic
w
r
oing an apply bas
on wh
r
an wh
n th
n
c
ssary
work w
r
impl
m
nting to solv
th
roa maint
nanc
probl
m bas
on th
crit
r
ia that list
b
low to mak
sur
th
capability an workability of work in high
int
nsity of
n uring quality of pav
m
nt for th
liv
y
ars. o Surfac
for lig
ht to m
ium traffic (ADT < 30,000) o Wat
rproof lay
r o Ski r
sistant surfac

o S
al th
surfac
o A r
ss bl

ing o T
mporary bas
cours
cov
r o D
fin
sho
ul
rs
Pictur
: Chip S
al Proc
ss
13

Aft
r w

fin
th
n
c
ssarily wh
n an wh
r
, w
hav
to know that th
chip s

al also hav
som
con ition that not r
lat
to th
main asp
ct. So, w
hav
to
consi
r th
right tim
wh
n w
ar
not going to us
th
Chip S
al as con ition
pr
f
r b
low; o Structurally
fici
nt pav
m
nts o Cracks >1/4 in wi th unl
ss
s
al
o Larg
numb
r of pothol
s o Rutting >1/2 in o Ri
quality n

s signifi
cant improv
m
nt
In or
r to th
st
p of succ
ss in chip s
al
sign, th
right k
y of chip s
al

sign w
hav
to consi
r so that th
work going to b
succ
ss an on
prop
rl
y. o Prop
r surfac
pr
paration o Us
th
right bin
r an cl
an aggr
gat
s o Fo
llow th
construction sp
cs, inclu ing th
n

for traffic control o Chip s
al
in goo w
ath
r con itions
Pictur
: Crit
ria D
sign St
p an
14

Proc
ss

2.3.2 Chip S
al Variations o Applications o Singl
chip s
als o Doubl
or tripl

chip s
als o Cap
s
als o Fabric an chip s
als o Scrub s
als o Asphalt Bin
r
Typ
s o PME o PMA o AR
(Singl
Chip S
als)
(Doubl
Chip S
als)
15

(Cap
S
als)
(Fabric an Chip S
als)
16

(Fabric an Chip S
als)

2.3.3 D
sign, Mat
rials & Sp
cifications
D
t
rmin
Quantity o R
si ual asphalt cont
nt o Asphalt c
m
nt factor = 1.0 o Em
ulsion factors rang
= 0.65 to 0.70 o Aggr
gat
application rat
o Singl
chip l
ay
r o No mor
than 10%
xc
ss chips o 70%
mb
m
nt r
comm
n

17

Chip S
al D
sign M
tho s

McL
o proc
ur
Asphalt Institut
m
tho
1. D
t
rmin
aggr
gat
siz
an sp
cific gravity 2. Aggr
gat
an bin
r quantit
i
s from tabl
3. A just aggr
gat
(if n
c
ssary) 4. A just asphalt cont
nt bas

on con ition of roa (if n
c
ssary) Mat
rial S
l
ction Bin
r Mat
rial S
l
ction-Emulsion Ingr
i
nts Asphalt Wat
r Emulsifying ag
nt (surfact
ant)
Polym
r-mo ifi

mulsions Polym
r-mo ifi


mulsions (PMRE) Asphalt Rubb
r

bin
r Polym
r-mo ifi

r
juv
nating

2.3.4 Asphalt Rubb
r Chip S
als Bin
r Mat
rial Fi
l Bl
n
(min. 45 minut
s a
n viscosity 1,500 cps-4,000) hot asphalt,
xt
n
r oil, crumb rubb
r, an high
natural.AR bin
r application is usually .60 gal / squar
yar through an agitat

istributor truck attach
with a vapor r
cov
ry syst
m. Aggr
gat
Chips ar

always hot pr
-coat
, an appli
at 35-40 lbs. p
r squar
yar .
18

Sourc
: Maint
nanc
T
chnical A visory Gui
(MTAG)-U.S

19

2.4
TYPES OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DISTRESS
In
x of Pav
m
nt Distr
ss
s Shown on this Pag

Fatigu
(alligator) cracking Bl

ing Block cracking Corrugation an shoving D
p
r
ssion Joint r
fl
ction cracking Lan
/shoul
r rop-off Longitu inal cracking P
atching
Polish
aggr
gat
Pothol
s Rav
ling Rutting Slippag
cracking Stripping Transv

rs
(th
rmal) cracking Wat
r bl

ing an pumping
2.4.1
Fatigu
(Alligator) Cracking This s
ction is a summary of th
major fl
xibl
pav

m
nt istr
ss
s. Each istr
ss iscussion inclu
s (1) pictur
s if availabl
, (
2) a
scription of th
istr
ss, (3) why th
istr
ss is a probl
m an (4) typi
cal caus
s of th
istr
ss.
20

D
scription S
ri
s of int
rconn
ct
cracks caus
by fatigu
failur
of th
HMA

surfac
(or stabiliz
bas
) un
r r
p
at
traffic loa ing. In thin pav
m
nts,
cracking initiat
s at th
bottom of th
HMA lay
r wh
r
th
t
nsil
str
ss is t
h
high
st th
n propagat
s to th
surfac
as on
or mor
longitu inal cracks. Th
is is commonly r
f
rr
to as "bottom-up" or "classical" fatigu
cracking. In th
ick pav
m
nts, th
cracks most lik
ly initiat
from th
top in ar
as of high loc
aliz
t
nsil
str
ss
s r
sulting from tir
-pav
m
nt int
raction an asphalt bin

r aging (top- own cracking). Aft
r r
p
at
loa ing, th
longitu inal cracks c
onn
ct forming many-si
sharp-angl
pi
c
s that
v
lop into a patt
rn r
s
mb
ling th
back of an alligator or croco il
. Probl
m In icator of structural fail
ur
, cracks allow moistur
infiltration, roughn
ss, may furth
r
t
riorat
to a
pothol
Possibl
Caus
s Ina
quat
structural support, which can b
caus
by a
myria of things. A f
w of th
mor
common on
s ar
list
h
r
:
o
D
cr
as
in pav
m
nt loa supporting charact
ristics Loss of bas
, sub bas
or s
ub gra
support (
.g., poor rainag
or spring thaw r
sulting in a l
ss stiff b
as
).
o
Stripping on th
bottom of th
HMA lay
r (th
stripp
portion contribut
s littl

to pav
m
nt str
ngth so th

ff
ctiv
HMA thickn
ss
cr
as
s)
o o
Incr
as
in loa ing (
.g., mor
or h
avi
r loa s than anticipat
in
sign) Ina

quat
structural
sign
21

o
Poor construction (
.g., ina
quat
compaction)
R
pair A fatigu
crack
pav
m
nt shoul b
inv
stigat
to
t
rmin
th
root c
aus
of failur
. Any inv
stigation shoul involv
igging a pit or coring th
pa
v
m
nt to
t
rmin
th
pav
m
nt's structural mak
up as w
ll as
t
rmining wh
t
h
r or not subsurfac
moistur
is a contributing factor. Onc
th
charact
ristic
alligator patt
rn is appar
nt, r
pair by crack s
aling is g
n
rally in
ff
ctiv

. Fatigu
crack r
pair g
n
rally falls into on
of two cat
gori
s:
o
Small, localiz
fatigu
cracking in icativ
of a loss of subgra
support. R
mo
v
th
crack
pav
m
nt ar
a th
n ig out an r
plac
th
ar
a of poor subgra

an improv
th
rainag
of that ar
a if n
c
ssary. Patch ov
r th
r
pair
subg
ra
.
o
Larg
fatigu
crack
ar
as in icativ
of g
n
ral structural failur
. Plac
an H
MA ov
rlay ov
r th

ntir
pav
m
nt surfac
. This ov
rlay must b
strong
nough
structurally to carry th
anticipat
loa ing b
caus
th
un
rlying fatigu
cra
ck
pav
m
nt most lik
ly contribut
s littl
or no str
ngth (Rob
rts
t. al., 19
96).
2.4.2
Bl

ing
D
scription A film of asphalt bin
r on th
pav
m
nt surfac
. It usually cr
at
s
a shiny, glass-lik
r
fl
cting surfac
(as in th
thir photo) that can b
com

quit
sticky. Probl
m Loss of ski r
sistanc
wh
n w
t
22

Possibl
Caus
s Bl

ring hot w
ath
r an
ot r
v
rsibl
uring
t surfac
ov
r tim
.
:

ing occurs wh
n asphalt bin
r fills th
aggr
gat
voi s u

th
n
xpan s onto th
pav
m
nt surfac
. Sinc
bl

ing is n
col w
ath
r, asphalt bin
r will accumulat
on th
pav
m
n
This can b
caus
by on
or a combination of th
following

Exc
ssiv
asphalt bin
r in th
HMA (
ith
r u
to mix

Exc
ssiv
application of asphalt bin
r

figur
s)

sign or manufacturing)

uring BST application (as in th
abov

Low HMA air voi cont
nt (
.g., not
nough room for th
asphalt to
xpan into
uring hot w
ath
r)
R
pair Th
following r
pair m
asur
s may
liminat
or r
uc
th
asphalt bin
r
film on th
pav
m
nt's surfac
but may not corr
ct th
un
rlying probl
m that c
aus
th
bl

ing:
Minor bl

ing can oft
n b
corr
ct


ss asphalt bin
r.

by applying coars
san

to blot up th

xc

Major bl

ing can b
corr
ct
by cutting off
xc
ss asphalt with a motor gra

r or r
moving it with a h
at
r plan
r. If th
r
sulting surfac
is
xc
ssiv
ly r
ough, r
surfacing may b
n
c
ssary (APAI, no at
giv
n).
23

2.4.3
Block Cracking
D
scription Int
rconn
ct
cracks that ivi
th
pav
m
nt up into r
ctangular p
i
c
s. Blocks rang
in siz
from approximat
ly 0.1 m2 (1 ft2) to 9 m2 (100 ft2).
Larg
r blocks ar
g
n
rally classifi
as longitu inal an transv
rs
cracking.
Block cracking normally occurs ov
r a larg
portion of pav
m
nt ar
a but som
ti
m
s will occur only in non-traffic ar
as. Probl
m Allows moistur
infiltration,
roughn
ss Possibl
Caus
s HMA shrinkag
an aily t
mp
ratur
cycling. Typically
caus
by an inability of asphalt bin
r to
xpan an contract with t
mp
ratur

cycl
s b
caus
of:
Asphalt bin
r aging Poor choic
of asphalt bin
r in th
mix
R
pair Strat
gi
s
p
n upon th
s
v
rity an

sign

xt
nt of th
block cracking:

Low s
v
rity cracks (< 1/2 inch wi
). Crack s
al to pr
v
nt (1)
ntry of moistu
r
into th
sub gra
through th
cracks an (2) furth
r rav
ling of th
crack

g
s. HMA can provi
y
ars of satisfactory s
rvic
aft
r
v
loping small crack
s if th
y ar
k
pt s
al
(Rob
rts
t. al., 1996).
24

High s
v
rity cracks (> 1/2 inch wi
an cracks with rav
l

g
s). R
mov
an
r
plac
th
crack
pav
m
nt lay
r with an ov
rlay
2.4.4
Corrugation an Shoving
D
scription A form of plastic mov
m
nt typifi
by rippl
s (corrugation) or an a
brupt wav
(shoving) across th
pav
m
nt surfac
. Th
istortion is p
rp
n icula
r to th
traffic ir
ction. Usually occurs at points wh
r
traffic starts an st
ops (corrugation) or ar
as wh
r
HMA abuts a rigi obj
ct (shoving). Probl
m Rou
ghn
ss Possibl
Caus
s Usually caus
by traffic action (starting an stopping)
combin
with:
An unstabl
(i.
. low stiffn
ss) HMA lay
r (caus
by mix contamination, poor mi
x
sign, poor HMA manufacturing, or lack of a
ration of liqui asphalt
mulsion
s)

Exc
ssiv
moistur
in th
sub gra

R
pair A h
avily corrugat
or shov
pav
m
nt shoul b
inv
stigat
to
t
rmi
n
th
root caus
of failur
. R
pair strat
gi
s g
n
rally fall into on
of two c
at
gori
s:
25

Small, localiz

an patch.

ar
as of corrugation or shoving. R
mov
th

istort

pav
m
nt

Larg
corrugat
or shov
ar
as in icativ
of g
n
ral HMA failur
. R
mov
th

amag
pav
m
nt an ov
rlay.
2.4.5
D
pr
ssion
D
scription Localiz
pav
m
nt surfac
ar
as with slightly low
r
l
vations than
th
surroun ing pav
m
nt. D
pr
ssions ar
v
ry notic
abl
aft
r a rain wh
n th

y fill with wat
r. Probl
m Roughn
ss,
pr
ssions fill
with substantial wat
r
can caus
v
hicl
hy roplaning Possibl
Caus
s Frost h
av
or sub gra
s
ttl
m

nt r
sulting from ina
quat
compaction uring construction. R
pair By
finitio
n,
pr
ssions ar
small localiz
ar
as. A pav
m
nt
pr
ssion shoul b
inv
st
igat
to
t
rmin
th
root caus
of failur
(i.
., sub gra
s
ttl
m
nt or fro
st h
av
). D
pr
ssions shoul b
r
pair
by r
moving th
aff
ct
pav
m
nt th
n
igging out an r
placing th
ar
a of poor sub gra
. Patch ov
r th
r
pair
s
ub gra
.
26

2.4.6
Joint R
fl
ction Cracking
D
scription Cracks in a fl
xibl
ov
rlay of a rigi pav
m
nt. Th
cracks occur
ir
ctly ov
r th
un
rlying rigi pav
m
nt joints. Joint r
fl
ction cracking o

s not inclu
r
fl
ction cracks that occur away from an un
rlying joint or from
any oth
r typ
of bas
(
.g., c
m
nt or lim
stabiliz
). Probl
m Allows moistu
r
infiltration, roughn
ss Possibl
Caus
s Mov
m
nt of th
PCC slab b
n
ath th

HMA surfac
b
caus
of th
rmal an moistur
chang
s. G
n
rally not loa initiat

, how
v
r loa ing can hast
n
t
rioration. R
pair Strat
gi
s
p
n upon th
s

v
rity an
xt
nt of th
cracking:
Low s
v
rity cracks (< 1/2 inch wi
an infr
qu
nt cracks). Crack s
al to pr
v

nt (1)
ntry of moistur
into th
sub gra
through th
cracks an (2) furth
r r
av
ling of th
crack
g
s. In g
n
ral, rigi pav
m
nt joints will
v
ntually r

fl
ct through an HMA ov
rlay without prop
r surfac
pr
paration.

High s
v
rity cracks (> 1/2 inch wi
an num
rous cracks). R
mov
an r
plac
t
h
crack
pav
m
nt lay
r with an ov
rlay.
27

2.4.7
Rav
ling
D
scription Th
progr
ssiv
isint
gration of an HMA lay
r from th
surfac
own
war as a r
sult of th
islo g
m
nt of aggr
gat
particl
s. Probl
m Loos

bri
s on th
pav
m
nt, roughn
ss, wat
r coll
cting in th
rav
l
locations r
sultin
g in v
hicl
hy roplaning, loss of ski r
sistanc
.
28

Possibl
Caus
s S
v
ral inclu ing:

Loss of bon

b
tw

n aggr
gat
particl
s an th
asphalt bin
r as a r
sult of:-

o
A ust coating on th
aggr
gat
particl
s that forc
s th
asphalt bin
r to bon
with th
ust rath
r than th
aggr
gat

o
Aggr
gat
S
gr
gation. If fin
particl
s ar
missing from th
aggr
gat
matrix,
th
n th
asphalt bin
r is only abl
to bin th
r
maining coars
particl
s at t
h
ir r
lativ
ly f
w contact points.
o
Ina
quat
compaction uring construction. High
nsity is r
quir
to
v
lop s
uffici
nt coh
sion within th
HMA. Th
thir figur
abov
shows a roa suff
ring
from rav
ling u
to ina
quat
compaction caus
by col w
ath
r paving.

M
chanical islo ging by c
rtain typ
s of traffic (stu
tir
s, snowplow bla

s or track
v
hicl
s). Th
first an fourth figur
s abov
show rav
ling most li
k
ly caus
by snow plows.
R
pair A rav
l
pav
m
nt shoul b
inv
stigat
to
t
rmin
th
root caus
of
failur
. R
pair strat
gi
s g
n
rally fall into on
of two cat
gori
s:
Small, localiz

ar
as of rav
ling. R
mov
th
rav
l

pav
m
nt an patch.

Larg
rav
l
ar
as in icativ
of g
n
ral HMA failur
. R
mov
th
amag
pav
m

nt an ov
rlay.
29

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1
FORMING GROUP
In w

k 1, l
ctur
r tol us th
r
is a proj
ct for Highway Engin

ring subj
ct a
n sh
ask
us to form in a group. Each group consists of 5 p
opl
but sp
cial
p
rmission to our group wh
r
w
contain of 6 stu
nts.
30

3.2
PROBLEM AND SCOPE OF PROJECT
In w

k 3, l
ctur
r gav
us th
probl
m an th
scop
of proj
ct. Sh
bri
fly
x
plain
th
probl
m. Th
probl
m was about th
roa s that hav
b

n built ar
of
t
n amag

u
to v
hicl
loa an
nvironm
nt. This situation r
quir
s th
mai
nt
nanc
work to b
on
so that it can provi
comfortabl
ri ing to roa us
rs
. Each of th
group has to con uct a surv
y of pav
m
nt con itions to
t
rmin

amag
s an r
comm
n appropriat
pav
m
nt pr
s
rvation work to local authoriti

s. Th
local authority woul lik
to us
chip s
al m
tho to r
pair th
amag

roa surfac
. Subs
qu
ntly, stu
nts hav
to
sign an appropriat
chip s
al tr

atm
nt. Th
factors of th
amag
to th
roa s also n

to b
r
vi
w
, stu i

an r
lat

sign asp
cts of th

xisting rainag
syst
m.
3.3
BRIEFING OR BRAINSTORMING SESSION
Our l
ctur
r gav
us a brainstorming on how to solv
th
r
lat
probl
m. In thi
s s
ssion, l
ctur
r ha giv
n us som
opinions such as th
proc
ur
s an th
r

quir
m
nts of th
proj
ct an th

quipm
nts that ar
n


for this proj
ct
31

3.4
DISCUSSION / INVESTIGATING PROBLEM
Aft
r th
l
ctur
r bri
f
us th
proj
ct probl
m an th
group iscussion on 26
July 2010, w
ha sugg
st
f
w sit
s for our proj
ct which ar
Parit J
lutong,
Jalan R
ngit, Taman M
l
war roa an Parit Haji Rais. To
t
rmin
th
sit
for
our proj
ct, w
hav
to con uct a surv
y on th
sit
so that th
sit
that w
c
hoos
is fulfill
th
r
quir
m
nts of this proj
ct such as minimum four cracks
within 1km of th
roa . W

ci
to choos
Parit J
lutong as our proj
ct sit

aft
r w
con uct
surv
ys on th
s
f
w sit
s on 30 July 2010. B
for
w
start t
h
onsit
laboratory works, w
w
r
ivi
into s
v
ral small groups. Each of t
h
group m
mb
r has to i
ntify th
probl
ms an o r
s
arch on th
probl
ms in
th
int
rn
t, books an journal. Aft
r that, th
i
ntifi
probl
ms will b
sol
v
in FILA tabl
by using brainstorming m
tho . Th
m
tho of FILA tabl
is as
followings:
FACTS - th
roa s that hav
b

n built ar
oft
n amag


nvironm
nt

u
to v
hicl
loa an

IDEAS -Singl
chip s
al -Doubl
chip s
al -Str
ss absorbing M
mbran
(SAM) -M
mb
ran
Int
rlay
r (SAMI)
LEARNING ISSUES -Typ
s of chip s
al -D
sign of chip s
al -Aggr
gat
for chip s
a
ls
ACTION PLANS - I
ntifi
th
cracks - Bas
on ata analysis, r
comm
n a
sig
n of chip s
al to r
pair th
cracks
32

3.5
ONSITE LABORATORY WORKS
W
i our onsit
laboratory works on 2 August 2010. First, w
m
asur
1km for
th
l
ngth an th
wi th of th
roa . At th
sam
tim
, w
count
th
traffic v
olum
for th
non-p
ak hour. Subs
qu
ntly, w
i th
san patch for 4 tim
s at
th
istanc
of 250m
ach. Th
san patch proc
ur
s ar
as following: 1. Ensur

th
pav
m
nt surfac
is cl
ar of
bris by sw

ping th
surfac
with a small br
ush. T
st ar
a is to b
cl
ar of cracking an th
pav
m
nt ar
a must b
ry. 2.
A known volum
of san , is m
asur
an th
n pour
onto th
roa surfac
to for
m a con
, using th
m
asuring cylin
r. 3. Spr
a th
san with th
spr
a ing i
sc to form a circular patch. Apply horizontal forc
s to th
spr
a ing tool an w
ork outwar s in a circular patt
rn until th
surfac

pr
ssions ar
fill
to t
h
l
v
l of th
p
aks. San is to b
us
only onc
. 4. M
asur
th
iam
t
r at
four iff
r
nt angl
s, rotating 45 b
tw

n
ach m
asur
m
nt.
Aft
r w
ha on
th
san patch, w
i
ntifi
th
typ
s of cracks, m
asur
th

l
ngth, wi th an
pth (pothol
) an fill
th
ata in th
lab sh

t. Cons
qu

ntly, w
count
th
traffic volum
again for th
p
ak hour an non p
ak hour f
rom 11pm -2pm an 4pm-7pm.
3.6
LABORATORY WORKS
Aft
r w
i th
onsit
laboratory works, w
i th
Flakin
ss an Elongation in

x laboratory to
t
rmin
th
siz
of th
chip s
al to b
us
.
33

3.7
RESULT ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION
Bas
on th
ata that got from on-sit
laboratory works an laboratory works, f
irstly w
hav
to g
t th
Pav
m
nt Con ition In
x (PCI) valu
. To obtain PCI va
lu
, th
r
ar
st
ps which ar
Distr
ss D
nsity, Corr
ct
D
uct Valu
an PCI
Rating scal
. Th
PCI valu
for s
ction 1, 2, 3 an 4 ar
54 (LOS D, POOR), 83 (
LOS B, SATISFACTORY), 81 (LOS B, SATISFACTORY) an 82 (LOS B, SATISFACTORY) r
sp

ctiv
ly. Th
total PCI valu
for 1km roa is 75 (LOS B, SATISFACTORY) which m
a
ns s
ction pav
m
nt is in satisfactory con ition, L
v
l of S
rvic
is B an n



to pr
v
ntiv
maint
nanc
. Bas
on th
total PCI valu
for 1 km l
ngth of th

roa , w

sign th
chip s
al
sign. Accor ing to our chip s
al
sign, w
r

comm
n that th
roa shall b
using Doubl
Chip S
al, th
siz
for first lay
r
is 14mm an th
siz
for s
con lay
r is 6mm.
3.8
FINAL REPORT AND PRESENTATION
W
submitt
our final r
port an pr
s
nt
our proj
ct on w

k 12. On Satur ay
16th Octob
r th
r
will b
a post
r pr
s
ntation will b
carri
out as part of
our
valuation.
3.9
FINAL EVALUATION
Final
valuation on our group will b
giv
n aft
r w
submitt
our final r
port
an i our pr
s
ntation bas
on quality of our r
port an pr
s
ntation an th

way that w
pr
s
nt
.
34

CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
35

BRANCH : TRAFFIC LABORATORY UTHM SURVEYED BY: MOGANRAJ

DATE : 9 AUGUST 2010 SAMPLE UNIT : SAMPLE AREA : 4.8m x 250m
SECTION : 4 (1 km)
11. Patching & 01. Aligator Cracking (m2) 06. D
pr
ssion (m2) 07. E g
Cracking
02. Bl

ing (m2) (m) 12. Polish
08. Joint R
fl
ction 03. Block Cracking (m2)
Cracking (m) 13. Pothol
s(no) 04. Bumps an Sags (m) 14. Railroa Crossing 05. C
orrugation (m2) 09. Lan
/shoul
r Drop (m) 15. Rutting (m2) (m) Aggr
gat
(m2) U
tility Cut Patching (m2)
17. Slippag
Cracking (m2)
18. Sw
ll (m2)
19. W
ath
ring/
Rav
lling (m2)
10. Longitu inal & Transv
rs
Cracking (m)
16. Shoving (m2)
36

Sampl
1 (for s
ction 0 250m) D
t
rmin
th
Distr
ss D
nsity an D
uct Valu
DI
STRESS SURVEY DEDUCT VALUE
QUANTITY
TOTAL
DENSITY (%)
100*(3.7/1200) 01M 3.7 3.7 = 0.31 100*(5.6/1200) 10M 5.6 5.6 = 0.47 100*(0.4/120
0) 13L 0.4 0.4 = 0.03 42 6 14
Maximum allowabl
numb
r of
ucts, m High
st
/98)(100 HDV) = 1 + (9/98)(100 42) = 6.33

uct valu
, HDV = 42 m = 1 + (9

D
ucts valu
s in
sc
n ing or
r = 42, 14, 6 Numb
r of

uct valu
= 3

Maximum Corr
ct
D
uct Valu
, CDV Numb
r of
uct valu
gr
at
r than 2, q = 3
Total
uct valu
= 42 + 14 + 6 = 62 From Figur
B 45, CDV = 40
37

NO 1 2 3 42 42 42 14 14 2
DEDUCT VALUES 6 2 2
TOTAL 62 58 46
q 3 2 1
CDV 40 43 46
Maximum CDV = 46
D
t
rmin
th
Pav
m
nt Con ition In
x, PCI
PCI
= 100 - CDVmax = 100 - 46 = 54 (LOS D, POOR)
Th
PCI is 54. Bas
on th
rating for PCI valu
of 54, this s
ction pav
m
nt is
in poor con ition, L
v
l of S
rvic
is D an n


to major r
habilitation or

f
rr
action.
38

Sampl
2 (for s
ction 250 500m) D
t
rmin
th
Distr
ss D
nsity an D
uct Valu

DISTRESS SURVEY DEDUCT VALUE
QUANTITY
TOTAL
DENSITY (%)
100*(11.3/1200) 10M 11.3 11.3 = 0.94 100*(0.3/1200) 13M 0.3 0.3 = 0.03 15 9
Maximum allowabl
numb
r of

ucts, m

High
st
uct valu
, HDV = 15 m = 1 + (9/98)(100 HDV) = 1 + (9/98)(100 15) = 8.

82
D
ucts valu
s in
sc
n ing or
r = 15, 9 Numb
r of
uct valu
= 2
Maximum Corr
ct
D
uct Valu
, CDV Numb
r of
uct valu
gr
at
r than 2, q = 2
Total
uct valu
= 15 + 9 = 24 From Figur
B 45, CDV = 17
39

NO 1 2 15 15 9 2
DEDUCT VALUES
TOTAL 24 17
q 2 1
CDV 17 17
Maximum CDV = 17
D
t
rmin
th
Pav
m
nt Con ition In
x, PCI
PCI
= 100 - CDVmax = 100 - 17 = 83 (LOS B, SATISFACTORY)
Th
PCI is 83. Bas
on th
rating for PCI valu
of 83, this s
ction pav
m
nt is
in satisfactory con ition, L
v
l of S
rvic
is B an n


to pr
v
ntiv
maint

nanc

40

Sampl
3 (for s
ction 500 750m) D
t
rmin
th
Distr
ss D
nsity an D
uct Valu

DISTRESS SURVEY
QUANTITY
TOTAL
DENSITY (%)
DEDUCT VALUE
100*(3.6/1200) 10M 3.6 3.6 = 0.30 100*(0.4/1200) 13L 0.4 0.4 = 0.03 100*(0.3/120
0) 13M 0.3 0.3 = 0.03 15 9 3
Maximum allowabl
numb
r of
ucts, m High
st
/98)(100 HDV) = 1 + (9/98)(100 15) = 8.82

uct valu
, HDV = 15 m = 1 + (9

D
ucts valu
s in
sc
n ing or
r = 15, 9, 3 Numb
r of
uct valu
= 3

Maximum Corr
ct
D
uct Valu
, CDV Numb
r of
uct valu
gr
at
r than 2, q = 3
Total
uct valu
= 15 + 9 + 3 = 27 From Figur
B 45, CDV = 15
41

NO 1 2 3 15 15 15 9 9 2
DEDUCT VALUES 3 2 2
TOTAL 27 26 19
q 3 2 1
CDV 15 19 19
Maximum CDV = 19
D
t
rmin
th
Pav
m
nt Con ition In
x, PCI
PCI
= 100 - CDVmax = 100 - 19 = 81 (LOS B, SATISFACTORY)
Th
PCI is 81. Bas
on th
rating for PCI valu
of 81, this s
ction pav
m
nt is
in satisfactory con ition, L
v
l of S
rvic
is B an n


to pr
v
ntiv
maint

nanc
.
42

Sampl
4 (for s
ction 750 1000m) D
t
rmin
th
Distr
ss D
nsity an D
uct Valu

DISTRESS SURVEY DEDUCT VALUE
QUANTITY
TOTAL
DENSITY (%)
100*(1.3/1200) 01M 0.2 1.1 1.3 = 0.11 100*(0/3/1200) 13M 0.3 0.3 = 0.03 15 8
Maximum allowabl
numb
r of

ucts, m

High
st
uct valu
, HDV = 15 m = 1 + (9/98)(100 HDV) = 1 + (9/98)(100 15) = 8.

82
D
ucts valu
s in
sc
n ing or
r = 15, 8 Numb
r of
uct valu
= 2
Maximum Corr
ct
D
uct Valu
, CDV Numb
r of
uct valu
gr
at
r than 2, q = 2
Total
uct valu
= 15 + 8 = 23 From Figur
B 45, CDV = 16
43

NO 1 2 15 15 8 2
DEDUCT VALUES
TOTAL 23 17
q 2 1
CDV 16 18
Maximum CDV = 18
D
t
rmin
th
Pav
m
nt Con ition In
x, PCI
PCI
= 100 - CDVmax = 100 - 18 = 82 (LOS B, SATISFACTORY)
Th
PCI is 82. Bas
on th
rating for PCI valu
of 82, this s
ction pav
m
nt is
in satisfactory con ition, L
v
l of S
rvic
is B an n


to pr
v
ntiv
maint

nanc
.
44

Calculation of th
PCI s
ction Jalan Parit J
lutong PCIri x Ari Ari Wh
r
, PCIS Ar
i = = PCI of pav
m
nt s
ction. Ar
a of th
ran om sampl
unit i.
PCIS
=
PCIS
= (54 + 83 + 81 + 82)(1200) 4800
=
75 (LOS B, SATISFACTORY)
Th
PCI is 75. Bas
on th
rating for PCI valu
of 75, this s
ction pav
m
nt is
in satisfactory con ition, L
v
l of S
rvic
is B an n


to pr
v
ntiv
maint

nanc
.
45

4.2
CHIP SEAL
Crit
ria of chip s
al
Existing Surfac
an traffic Soft surfac
, such as P
n
tration Maca am with < 10
00 v
hicl
p
r ay Soft surfac
with > 1000 v
hicl
p
r ay M
ium surfac
, such
as roll
asphalt with < 1000 v
hicl
p
r ay Har surfac
, such as Portlan C

m
nt Concr
t
or Asphalt Concr
t
> 1000 v
hicl
p
r ay Tabl
Singl
Chip S
l
c
tion Crit
ria
Nominal siz
(mm) 20mm
14mm 10mm 6mm
Existing Surfac
an traffic
Nominal siz
1st + 2n s
al (mm)
Soft to m
ium surfac
with < 1000 v
hicl
p
r ay Har surfac
with > 1000 v
hi
cl
p
r ay Tabl
Doubl
Chip S
l
ction Crit
ria
20 + 10 14 + 6
Data gain
from obs
rvation of total v
hicl
s us
th
roa , it is
fin
that
total v
hicl
s us
th
roa in a ay ar
:
Traffic in lan
volum
p
r hour Traffic in lan
(vp /lan
)
= =
62 vph/hour/lan
1488 vp / ay/lan

46

D
sign of Chip S
al For Jalan Parit J
lutong

Propos
of Doubl
chip s
al for pr
v
ntiv
maint
nanc
at Jalan Parit J
lutong,
Parit Raja, Batu Pahat Johor.
DETERMINATION OF SIZE, SHAPE AND GRADING OF SEALING CHIPS
Class No. Thickn
ss Tally (a) Rang
Ston
s In mm Class (b) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 <1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9 - 10 10 - 11 11 - 12 12 - 13 13
- 14 0 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5 10.5 11.5 12.5 13.5
Total tally (c)
Cum. Tally ( )
Cum p
rc
nt (
)
(a) x (c) (f)
4 4 5 5 10 13 14 13 13 13 8
4 8 13 18 28 41 55 68 80 92 100
4 8 13 18 28 41 55 68 80 92 100
8 12 20 25 60 91 112 117 120 132 96
47

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
14 - 15 15 - 16 16 - 17 17 - 18 18 - 19 19 - 20 20 - 21 21 - 22 22 - 23 23 - 24
24 - 25 (c) =
14.5 15.5 16.5 17.5 18.5 19.5 20.5 21.5 22.5 23.5 24.5 100 (f) = 793
For 6mm: Aggr
gat
Av
rag
L
ast Dim
nsion, ALD: [
] 7.97 mm
ALD6mm
= = =
For 14mm:
48

(f) / (c) 0.5 ] [ 793 / 100 0.5

Class No. Thickn
ss Tally (a) Rang
Ston
s In mm Class (b) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 <1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9 - 10 10 11 11 - 12 12 - 13 13 - 14 14 - 15 15 - 16 16 - 17 17 - 18 18 - 19 19 - 20 20 21 0 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5 10.5 11.5 12.5 13.5 14.5 15.5 16.5 17.5
18.5 19.5 20.5
Total tally (c)
Cum. Tally ( )
Cum p
rc
nt (
)
(a) x (c) (f)
1 3 6 12 10 13 10 12 10 7 6 4 4 2
1 4 10 22 32 45 55 67 77 84 90 94 98 100
1 4 10 22 32 45 55 67 77 84 90 94 98 100
6 21 48 108 100 143 120 156 140 105 96 68 72 38
49

22 23 24 25
21 - 22 22 - 23 23 - 24 24 - 25

(c) =

21.5 22.5 23.5 24.5 100 (f) = 1221

Aggr
gat
Av
rag
L
ast Dim
nsion, ALD: [ (f) /
mm

(c) 0.5 ] [ 1221 / 100 0.5 ] 12.27

ALD14mm
= = =
Bin
r Rat
of Application, R
R
= ( 0.138 x ALD +
) x Tf
Wh
r
: ALD : Av
rag
L
ast Dim
nsion (mm)
Tf : Bitum
n n


to fill roa su
rfac
: Factor to allow an incr
as
application rat
for low traffic volum
to

lay Durability failur

For 6 mm: R = [ ( 0.138 x 7.97 ) + 0.004 ] x 1.0021 = 1.106 l/m2
50

For 14 mm: R = [ ( 0.138 x 12.27 ) + 0.004 ] x 1.0021 = 1.701 l/m2

Aggr
gat
, C
C
= 1.364 x ALD
Wh
r
: C = Cov
r Aggr
gat
(kg/m2) Aggr
gat
Av
rag
L
ast Dim
nsion (mm)
ALD =
For 6 mm: C = 1.364 x ALD = 1.364 x 7.97 = 10.87 kg/m2
For 14 mm: C = 1.364 x ALD = 1.364 x 12.27 = 16.74 kg/m2
51

4.3 SAND PATCH DATA

Volum
= 45 ml = 2.5 cm h H
ight = 9.30 cm
Point
Diam
t
r 1
Diam
t
r 2
Diam
t
r 3
Diam
t
r 4
Diam
t
r 5
Diam
t
r 6
Av
rag
(mm)
1 510 2 490 3 450 4 510 540 510 540 530 530 526.67 450 450 460 450 440 450.00 45
0 470 480 460 470 470.00 510 480 500 510 480 498.33
Av
rag
Diam
t
r
=
498.33 + 470 + 450 + 526.67 4
=
486.25 mm
52

Th
t
xtur

pth, T

T
=
4V

D2

Wh
r
: V = Volum
(ml) D = Diam
t
r (mm)

T
=
4V D2
=
4(45)

(486.25)2 2.42 x 10-4 mm

=
4.4
COST RATE ESTIMATION
Propos
of Doubl
lay
r chip S
al for pr
v
ntiv
maint
nanc
at Jalan Parit J
l
utong, Parit Raja, Batu Pahat, Johor Darul Tazim. For 4800 m2 area of chip seal w
ill bring two (2) days work.
First layer Supply and Lay Modified Bitumen or Equivalent for the Chip Seal Laye
r o For bitumen application rate of 1.10 litres /sq .m to 1.30 litres/sq.
53

Machinery Descriptions Rate per day (RM) 570 TOTAL Quantity 1 Days 2 Total (RM)
1140 1140
20Tonne Dump Truck

Manpower Descriptions General Labour Driver Rate per day (RM) 50 65 TOTAL Quanti
ty 2 2 Days 2 2 Total (RM) 200 260 460

Raw Materials (Bitumen) 1.10 litres /sq .m to 1.30 litres/sq (Average 1.2 litres
/sq.m)
Description
Rate per barrel (RM) RM 500 TOTAL
Quantit y 29
Total
Bitumen
14500 14500
NOTE :
1 Barrel = 200 litres 4800 m2 x 1.2litres/m2 = 5760 litres (5760 litres /
200 litres) = 28.8 29 barrels 4800 m2 need 29 barrels bitumen for first layer.
54

COST for 4800m2 ITEM Machinery Manpower Materials Cost Profit 40% Total for 4800
m COST (RM) 1 140 460 14 500 16 100 16 100 x 0.4 = 6 440 22 540.00
22540.00 Rate for 1 m = 4800
= RM 4.70/ m2 to be transfer in Bill of Quantity
55

Supply, Lay and Compact uniformly 16 mm pre coated cover aggregates as Chip Seal
Layer
a)
Machinery Description Rate per day (RM) 577 420 Quantity 1 1 Days 2 2 Total (RM)
1154 840
Asphalt Paver 7 Tonne Tandem Roller Sweeper
495 TOTAL
1
2
990 2 984
b)
Manpower Rate per day (RM) 50 85 TOTAL Quantity Days Total (RM)
Description
Bitumen Worker Operator
7 4
2 2
700 680 1 380
56

c)
Raw Materials (Aggregate) Descriptions Rate per tan(RM) 14 mm Aggregate 38 Quant
ity Total (RM) 178.886 6797.67
TOTAL NOTE : 6797.67
Quantity = Area x Thickness of Aggregate x Density of Aggregate Quantity = 4800
m2 x 0.014 m x 2.662 Mg/m3 = 178.886 tonne
d)
Cost for 4800 m ITEM Machinery Manpower Materials Cost Profit 40% Total for 4 800
m COST (RM) 2 984 1 380 6 797.67 11 161.67 11 161.67 x 0.4 = 4 464.67 15 626.34
Rate for 1 m =
15626.34 4800
= RM 3.26/ m2 to be transfer in Bill of Quantity
57

SECOND LAYER Supply and lay second layer modified bitumen or equivalent for the
chip seal layer: For bitumen application rate of 0.8 litres/sq.m to 1.0 litres/s
q.
a)
Machinery Descriptions 20 Tonne Dump Truck Rate per day (RM) 570 Quantity Days T
otal (RM)
1
2
1140
TOTAL
1140
b)
Manpower Descriptions Rate per day (RM) General Labor Driver 50 Quantity Days To
tal (RM)
2
2
200
65 TOTAL
2
2
260 460
58

c)
Raw Materials (Bitumen) 1.10 litres /sq .m to 1.30 litres/sq (Average 1.2 litres
/sq.m) Description Bitumen Rate per barrel (RM) RM 500 TOTAL Quantity 22 Total 1
1 500 11 500
NOTE:o 1 Barrel = 200 litres o 4800 m2 x 0.9litres/m2 = 4 320 litres o (4 320 li
tres / 200 litres) = 21.6 22 barrels o 4800 m2 need 22 barrels bitumen for first
layer.
d)
COST for 4800m2 ITEM Machinery Manpower Materials Cost Profit 40% Total for 4800
m COST (RM) 1 140 460 11 500 13 100 13 100 x 0.4 = 5 240 18 340.00
59

18340 Rate for 1 m = 4800

= RM 3.82/ m2 to be transfer in Bill of Quantity
Supply, lay second layer modified bitumen or equivalent for the chip seal layer:
For bitumen application of 0.8 litres/sq.m to 1.0 litres/sq.
a)
Machinery Rate per day (RM) 577 Quantity Days 1 2 Total (RM) 1154
Description Asphalt Paver 7 Tonne Tandem Roller Sweeper
420
1
2
840
495 TOTAL
1
2
990 2 984
60

b)
Manpower Description Bitumen Worker Operator Rate per day (RM) 50 Quantity Days
Total (RM)
7
2
700
85 TOTAL
4
2
680 1 380
c)
Raw Materials (Aggregate) Descriptions 6 mm Aggregate Rate per tan (RM) 40 Quant
ity Total (RM)
76.666
3 066.64
TOTAL
3 066.64
NOTE: Quantity = Area x Thickness of Aggregate x Density of Aggregate Quantity =
4800 m2 x 0.006 m x 2.662 Mg/m3 = 76.666 tonne
61

d)
Cost for 4 800 m ITEM Machinery Manpower Materials Cost Profit 40% Total for 4 80
0 m COST (RM) 2 984 1 380 3 066.64 7 430.64 7 430.64 x 0.4 = 2 972.26 10 402.90
Rate for 1 m =
10402.90 4800
= RM 2.17/ m2 to be transfer in Bill of Quantity
62

4.4.1
BILL OF QUANTITY.
PROPOSED OF DOUBLE LAYER CHIP SEAL PREVENTIVE MAINTENANANCE AT JALAN PARIT JELUT
ONG
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
RATE (RM)
QUANTITY
AMOUNT (RM)
1.
Supply and lay modified bitumen of equivalent for the chip seal layer :I. For bi
tumen application rate of 1.10 litres per square meter to 1.30 liters per square
meter.
m2
4.70
4800
22 560.00
Supply, lay and compact uniformly 14 mm precoated cover aggregates as chip seal.
2. Supply and lay second layer modified bitumen or equivalent for chip seal lay
er: 3. II. For bitumen application rate of 0.8 litres/sq.m to 1.10/sq.m m2 3.26
4800 15 648.00
63

Supply, lay and and compact 6mm precoated cover aggregate as chip seal layer.
m2
3.82
4800
18 336.00
4
m2
2.17
4800
10 416.00
TOTAL COST
66 960.00
Unquestionably, all of the design methods can effectively guide inexperienced pe
rsonnel through the process of chip seal design. The following best practices ca
n be drawn from a comparison of the chip seal design methodologies. To begin, th
e selection of the binder is a very important decision and should be made after
considering all the factors under which the chip seal is expected to perform. Af
ter all, the primary purpose of a chip seal is to prevent water intrusion into t
he underlying pavement structure, and the asphalt layer formed by the binder is
the mechanism that performs this vital function. The previously explained design
methods are all based on the assumption that single-course chip seal design req
uired the use of uniformly manner. The application rates of all methods appear t
o be based on residual binder and each method has a procedure for dealing with a
djustments owing to factoring the loss of binder to absorption by the underlying
pavement surface and the aggregate being used. Contemporary design practices ne
ed to determine binder application rated based on surface characterization,
64

absorption factors, traffic condition, climate consideration, aggregate selectio

n, and the type of chip seal being constructed. Another important discovery is t
hat all methods have a design objective for embedment to be between 50% and 70%
of that seals depth. Best practices for chip seal design are difficult to isolate
, because there appears to be such a large variation in practices from agency to
agency. However, the following can be identified as meeting this projects defini
tion for best practices:
Chip seal perform best only on roads with low underlying surface distress that w
ill benefit from this technology.
The international practice is to characterize
the underlying roads texture and surface hardness and use that as a basis for dev
eloping the subsequent formal chip seal design. Where the local council response
s indicated a routine use of qualitative characterization in the design process.
Thus, the next logical enhancement would be to incorporate international method
s to quantitatively characterize the underlying surface in the chip seal design
process. One of those enhancements would be to try using the racked-in seal as t
he corrective measure for bleeding instead of spreading fine aggregate and sand
on the bleeding surface.
65

CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
5.2
CONCLUSION
The conclusion in this area is quite evident. First, the selection of chip seal
materials is project dependent, and the engineer in charge of design must fully
understand not only the pavement and traffic conditions in which the chip seal w
ill operate but also the climatic condition under which the chip seal will be ap
plied. It appears that the widespread use of emulsion binder chip seal results f
rom the nation that emulsion are less sensitive to environmental conditions duri
ng construction. Additionally, as emulsions are installed at a lower binder temp
erature they are probably less hazardous to the construction crew. Binder perfor
mance can be improved through the use of modifiers such as polymers and crumb ru
bber.
66

Next, the selection of the binder is dependent on the type of aggregate that is
economically available for the chip seal project. In other way, we could to bear
additional aggregate costs to ensure the quality of their chip seals are someth
ing that should be seriously considered in this area.
The aggregate should be checked to ensure that electrostatic compatibility is me
t with the type of binder specified. Also pre-coating of the aggregate appears t
o be required for use with hot asphalt cement binders to ensure good adhesion af
ter application. Finally, it appears that the use of geotextile-reinforced chip
seal is promising and should be considered for those roads that have more than n
ormal surface distress and for which an overlay is not warranted. Therefore, sev
eral next practices can be extracted from the foregoing discussion:
Conduct elec
trostatic testing of chip seal aggregate source before chip design to ensure tha
t the binder selected for the project is compatible with the potential sources o
f aggregate. Specify a uniformly graded high-quality aggregate.
Consider using l
ightweight synthetic aggregate in areas where postconstruction vehicle damage is
a major concern. Use life-cycle cost analysis to determine the benefit of impor
ting either synthetic aggregate or high-quality natural aggregate to areas where
availability of high-quality aggregate is limited.
Use polymer-modified binders
to enhance chip seal performance
67

5.1
SUGGESTION
Since the failed pavement been identified and the sand patch method carried out,
the design using chip seal method have been analyzed. So the best ways to solve
those pavement failures are through the chip seal method, this is because of fe
w concrete reasons which are:More durable and long lasting Protect and preserve
the pavement from heavy climate weather Extend pavement life
Basically chip sealing is a common pavement preservation tactic that prevents wa
ter from seeping into an asphalt pavements base course and sub-grade, while imp
roving skid resistance and rehabilitating weathered asphalt surfaces. This asses
sment has found that chip seal practices can be instituted that will improve the
reliability of maintenance chip seals. Many of the best practices identified fe
ll in the areas of construction procedures and equipment management practice. Th
is is not surprising, in that construction is the most critical portion of the c
hip seal project life cycle.
The area that apparently been surveyed which is Parit Jelutong has the greatest
potential for enhancement is chip seal design. This is also the area in which ad
vancements in technical understanding will have the greatest potential to dispel
the view that the use of chip seals is merely an art. The major issue in chip s
eal design lies in accurately characterizing the surface on which the seal will
be applied, through using engineering measurements of macro-texture and hardness
.
68

APPENDIX
Measuring Distance
Length of 1km taken
Cone Been Placed
Sand Patch Circle
Patching To a Circullar Shape
Sand Patch Diameter Taken
Collecting Back The Sand
69

Shoving
Edge Drop-off
Pothole Crocodile Crack
Longitunal Crack
Cracking
70

Length of Crack Measured

Transverse Crack
Pothole
Longitunal Crack
Aligator Crack
Tranverse Crack
71

Edge Crack
Pothole Depth Measured
Block Crack
Crack Length Measured
72

REFERENCES
Garber N.J. and Hoel L.A. Traffic & Highway Engineering (3rd Edition). US: Brook
s/Cole
Norman Edwards, Peter Keys (1996), Singapore - A Guide to Buildings, Stre
ets, Places, Times Books International, Victor R Savage, Brenda S A Yeoh (2003),
Toponymics - A Study of Singapore Street Names, Eastern Universities
Jones, Ken
D., Arthur F. McClure and Alfred E. Twomey. The Types Road Failures. New York:
Castle Books, 1970. Small, Kenneth A.; Jos A. Gomez-Ibaez (1998). Road Pricing for
Congestion Management: The Transition from Theory to Policy. The University of
California Transportation Center, University of California at Berkeley. pp. 213.
John Shadely, Acoustical analysis of the New Jersey Turnpike widening project b
etween Raritan and East Brunswick, Bolt Beranek and Newman, 1973
Michael Hogan,
Highway Noise, 3rd Environmental Pollution Symposium
73