Correlative Study of LWD, DCP and CBR for sub-grade

  IJETT-book-cover  International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT)          
© 2019 by IJETT Journal
Volume-67 Issue-9
Year of Publication : 2019
Authors : AE. Prakashkumar Makwana, Dr. Rakesh kumar Haque
DOI :  10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V67I9P215


MLA Style: AE. Prakashkumar Makwana, Dr. Rakesh kumar "Correlative Study of LWD, DCP and CBR for sub-grade" International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology 67.9 (2019):89-98.

APA Style:AE. Prakashkumar Makwana, Dr. Rakesh kumar. Correlative Study of LWD, DCP and CBR for sub-grade International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology, 67(9),89-98.

The mechanistic – empirical pavement design approach is a utilizing the sub-grade modulus but to evaluate a modulus is a costly, laborious and complex as compared to california bearing ratio (CBR) and dynamic penetration index (DPI). For rapid work and to benefit pavement engineer, robustly correlation model equations are required to connect sub-grade modulus with CBR and dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) obtained dynamic penetration index (DPI). In this study, the light weight deflectometre (LWD) has been used to evaluate in-situ sub-grade modulus, the DCP for DPI and core cutter for field dry density (FDD). Total 52 pit locations of the Kutch region of Gujarat state were finalized to perform tests on in-service flexible pavement and also samples were collected from each location for laboratory examination. The statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) tool was used for developing a regression model. Power regression models were found in the best fit, which connecting soaked CBR with DPI, sub-grade modulus with DPI and CBR, and shows a strong correlation of a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.876, 0.811 and 0.859 respectively. Linear regression models were developed for connecting sub-grade and CBR with geotechnical parameters such as plasticity index (PI), water content (W) and field dry density.


[1] Ahmad Kamil, A. (2007) Flexible pavement design: Transitioning from empirical to mechanistic-based design methods. Cover Story, JURUTERA, July
[2] Alshibli, K. A., Abu-Farsakh, M., & Seyman, E. (2005). Laboratory evaluation of the geogauge and light falling weight deflectometer as construction control tools. Journal of materials in civil engineering, 17(5), 560-569.
[3] Alshibli, K., Nazzal, M., & Seyman, E. (2004). Assessment of in-situ test technology for construction control of base courses and embankments (No. FHWA/LA. 04/389,). Baton Rouge, LA, USA: Louisiana Transportation Research Center.
[4] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1993)
[5] American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), ASTM D6951/D6951M – 09 Standard Test Method for Use of the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer in Shallow Pavement Applications.
[6] American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), ASTM E2583-07 Standard Test Method for Measuring Deflections with a Light Weight Deflectometer (LWD).
[7] Chen, D. H., Lin, D. F., Liau, P. H., & Bilyeu, J. (2005). A correlation between dynamic cone penetrometer values and pavement layer moduli. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 28(1), 42-49.
[8] Chen, D. H., Wang, J. N., & Bilyeu, J. (2001). Application of dynamic cone penetrometer in evaluation of base and subgrade layers. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1764), 1-10.
[9] Chen, J., Hossain, M., & Latorella, T. (1999). Use of falling weight deflectometer and dynamic cone penetrometer in pavement evaluation. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1655), 145-151.
[10] Christ van Gurp, Roel Cillessen, Sjoerd Blom, (2010). The use of LWD on granular bases and asphalt structures, 6th European FWD Users Group Meeting - 10-11 June.
[11] Chua, K. M., & Lytton, R. L. (1981). Dynamic analysis using the portable dynamic cone penetrometer. Transportation Research Record, 1192, 702-708
[12] Egorov, K. E. (1965, September). Calculation of bed for foundation with ring footing. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering (Vol. 2, pp. 41-45).
[13] Erlingsson, S. (2007). On forecasting the resilient modulus from the CBR value of granular bases. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 8(4), 783-797.
[14] Fleming, P.R., Frost, M.W., & Lambert, J.P. (2007). Review of lightweight deflectometer for routine in situ assessment of pavement material stiffness. Transportation research record: journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2004(1), 80-87.
[15] Gabr, M. A., Hopkins, K., Coonse, J., & Hearne, T. (2000). DCP criteria for performance evaluation of pavement layers. Journal of performance of constructed facilities, 14(4), 141-148.
[16] George, V., Rao, N. C., & Shivashankar, R. (2009). PFWD, DCP and CBR correlations for evaluation of lateritic subgrades. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 10(3), 189-199.
[17] Heukelom, W., & Foster, C. R. (1960). Dynamics Testing of Pavements. Journal of the soil Mechanics and Foundations division, 86(1), 1-28.
[18] Indian Road Congress (IRC), IRC: 37-2012 Guidelines for the Design of Flexible Pavements (Third Revision).
[19] Indian Standard 2720 Part- 2 (1973 Methods of Test for Soils Part II Determination of Water Content (Second Revision)
[20] Indian Standard 2720 Part- 29 (1975) Determination of Dry Density of Soils in Place by The Core-Cutter Method
[21] Indian Standard 2720: Part 16 (1987) “Methods of Test for Soil Part 16 Laboratory Determination of CBR” (Second Revision)
[22] Indian Standard 2720: Part 5 (1985) “Method of Test for Soils Part 5 Determination of Liquid and Plastic limit (Second Revision)
[23] Kavussi, A., Rafiei, K., & Yasrobi, S. (2010). Evaluation of PFWD as potential quality control tool of pavement layers. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 16(1), 123-129
[24] Konrad, J. M., & Lachance, D. (2001). Use of in situ penetration tests in pavement evaluation. Canadian geotechnical journal, 38(5), 924-935.
[25] Lin, D. F., Liau, C. C., & Lin, J. D. (2006). Factors affecting portable falling weight deflectometer measurements. Journal of geotechnical and geo-environmental engineering, 132(6), 804-808.
[26] Makwana P. (2016), Structural evaluation and quality assurance of flexible pavement using Light Weight Deflectometer, International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering, 6(3), pp 160-167
[27] Makwana P. and Kumar R. (2016), LWD Induced Flexible Pavement Rehabilitation Strategies, Lambert Academic Publishing (LAP), ISBN: 978-3-659-67306-1
[28] NCHRP. (2004). “Guide for Mechanisitc-Empirical Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement Structures,” Final Report for Project 1-37A, Part 1 & Part 3, Chap. 4, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
[29] P Edwards& P Fleming (2009) LWD Good Practice Guide.
[30] Pen, C. K. (1990). An assessment of the available methods of analysis for estimating the elastic moduli of road pavements. Third international conference on bearing capacity of roads and airfields. Proceedings, Norwegian institute of technology, Trondheim, Norway, july 3-5 1990. Volumes 1-2. Publication of: tapir publishers.
[31] Powell, W. D., Potter, J. F., Mayhew, H. C., & Nunn, M. E. (1984). The structural design of bituminous roads (No. LR 1132 Monograph).
[32] Rao, C. N., George, V., & Shivashankar, R. (2008, October). PFWD, CBR and DCP evaluation of lateritic subgrades of Dakshina Kannada, India. In The 12th International Conference of International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics. Goa: Indian Institute of Technology.
[33] Rathje, E. M., Wright, S. G., Stokoe, K. H., Adams, A., Tobin, R., & Salem, M. (2006). Evaluation of non-nuclear methods for compaction control.
[34] Sawangsuriya, A., & Edil, T. B. (2005). Evaluating stiffness and strength of pavement materials. Proceedings of the ICE-Geotechnical Engineering, 158(4), 217-230.
[35] Scala, A. J. (1956). Simple methods of flexible pavement design using cone penetrometers. New Zealand Engineering, 11(2), 34.
[36] Seyman, E. (2003). Laboratory evaluation of in-situ tests as potential QC/QA tools (Doctoral dissertation, MS thesis, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey).
[37] Siekmeier, J. A., Young, D., & Beberg, D. (2000). Comparison of the dynamic cone penetrometer with other tests during subgrade and granular base characterization in Minnesota. ASTM Special Technical Publication, 1375, 175-188.
[38] Singh, N. K., Eng, P., Mejia, C., Martison, T., & Shah, F. (2010) Use of the Light Weight Deflectometer (LWD) at Highland Valley Copper Mine. GEO2010, Calgary, Alberta, in the New West.
[39] Steinert, B. C., Humphrey, D. N., & Kestler, M. A. (2006, January). Portable falling weight deflectometers for tracking seasonal stiffness variations in asphalt surfaced roads. In 85th Transportation Research Board meeting, National Research Council, CD-ROM, Washington DC, USA.
[40] Sulewska, M. J. (2004). The Application of the Modern Method of Embankment Compaction Control. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 10, 45-50.
[41] Tehrani, F. S., Meehan, C. L., & Vahedifard, F. Comparison of Density-Based and Modulus-Based in Situ Tests for Earthwork Quality Control. In Geo-Congress 2014 Technical Papers@ Geo-characterization and Modeling for Sustainability (pp. 2345-2354). ASCE.
[42] Tripathi B., Makwana P., Kumar R, (2016), Study of Nuclear Density Gauge for Compaction Measure, Lambert Academic Publishing (LAP), ISBN: 978-3-659-76344-1
[43] Webster, S. L., Grau, R. H., & Williams, T. P. (1992). Description and application of dual mass dynamic cone penetrometer (No. WES/IR/GL-92-3). Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Vicksburg Ms Geotechnical Lab.
[44] Witczak, M. W., Qi, X., & Mirza, M. W. (1995). Use of nonlinear subgrade modulus in AASHTO design procedure. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 121(3), 273-282

Sub-grade modulus, california bearing ratio, light weight deflectometre, dynamic cone penetrometer.