UFC 3-250-09FA Aggregate Surfaced Roads and Airfields Areas

22 Pages·2006·0.44 MB·English

UFC 3-250-09FA
16 January 2004

UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC)

AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADS
AND AIRFIELDS AREAS

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED
UFC 3-250-09FA
16 January 2004

UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC)

AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADS AND AIRFIELDS AREAS

Any copyrighted material included in this UFC is identified at its point of use.
Use of the copyrighted material apart from this UFC must have the permission of the
copyright holder.

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (Preparing Activity)

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND

AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER SUPPORT AGENCY

Record of Changes (changes are indicated by \1\ ... /1/)

Change No. Date Location

This UFC supersedes TM 5-822-12, dated 28 September 1990. The format of this UFC does not
conform to UFC 1-300-01; however, the format will be adjusted to conform at the next revision.
The body of this UFC is the previous TM 5-822-12, dated 28 September 1990.

1
UFC 3-250-09FA
16 January 2004
FOREWORD
\1\
The Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) system is prescribed by MIL-STD 3007 and provides
planning, design, construction, sustainment, restoration, and modernization criteria, and applies
to the Military Departments, the Defense Agencies, and the DoD Field Activities in accordance
with USD(AT&L) Memorandum dated 29 May 2002. UFC will be used for all DoD projects and
work for other customers where appropriate. All construction outside of the United States is
also governed by Status of forces Agreements (SOFA), Host Nation Funded Construction
Agreements (HNFA), and in some instances, Bilateral Infrastructure Agreements (BIA.)
Therefore, the acquisition team must ensure compliance with the more stringent of the UFC, the
SOFA, the HNFA, and the BIA, as applicable.

UFC are living documents and will be periodically reviewed, updated, and made available to
users as part of the Services’ responsibility for providing technical criteria for military
construction. Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (HQUSACE), Naval Facilities
Engineering Command (NAVFAC), and Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency (AFCESA) are
responsible for administration of the UFC system. Defense agencies should contact the
preparing service for document interpretation and improvements. Technical content of UFC is
the responsibility of the cognizant DoD working group. Recommended changes with supporting
rationale should be sent to the respective service proponent office by the following electronic
form: Criteria Change Request (CCR). The form is also accessible from the Internet sites listed
below.

UFC are effective upon issuance and are distributed only in electronic media from the following
source:

• Whole Building Design Guide web site http://dod.wbdg.org/.

Hard copies of UFC printed from electronic media should be checked against the current
electronic version prior to use to ensure that they are current.

AUTHORIZED BY:

______________________________________ ______________________________________
DONALD L. BASHAM, P.E. DR. JAMES W WRIGHT, P.E.
Chief, Engineering and Construction Chief Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Naval Facilities Engineering Command

______________________________________ ______________________________________
KATHLEEN I. FERGUSON, P.E. Dr. GET W. MOY, P.E.
The Deputy Civil Engineer Director, Installations Requirements and
DCS/Installations & Logistics Management
Department of the Air Force Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Installations and Environment)

2
TM 5-822-12
TECHNICAL MANUAL
DESIGN OF AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADS
AND AIRFIELDS
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
September 1990
REPRODUCTION
AUTHORIZATION/RESTRICTIONS
This manual has been prepared by or for the Government and is public property and not subject to copyright.
Reprints or republications of this manual should include a credit substantially as follows: “Department of the Army,
Technical Manual 5-822-12, Design of Aggregate Surfaced Roads and Airfields, 28 September 1990.
TM 5-822-12
TECHNICAL MANUAL HEADQUARTERS
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
No. 5-822-12 Washington, DC, 28 September 1990
DESIGN OF AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADS AND AIRFIELDS
Approved for public
release; distribution is
unlimited
Paragraph Page
PURPOSE....................................................................................................................................... 1 3
SCOPE............................................................................................................................................ 2 3
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................ 3 3
DESIGN OF AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADS............................................................................ 4 3
DESIGN OF AGGREGATE SURFACED AIRFIELDS...................................................................... 5 5
DESIGN CBR FOR SELECT MATERIALS AND SUBBASES........................................................... 6 5
FROST AREA CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................................. 7 6
SURFACE COURSE REQUIREMENTS........................................................................................... 8 9
COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS................................................................................................... 9 9
DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS......................................................................................................... 10 9
MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.................................................................................................. 11 11
DUST CONTROL............................................................................................................................. 12 11
DESIGN EXAMPLES NO. 1............................................................................................................ 13 12
DESIGN EXAMPLE NO. 2.............................................................................................................. 14 14
DESIGN EXAMPLE NO. 3.............................................................................................................. 15 14
APPENDIX A: REFERENCES.......................................................................................................... A-1
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Criteria for selecting aggregate surface road class............................................................... 5
2. Design index for pneumatic-tired vehicles............................................................................ 5
3. Design index for tracked vehicles and forklift trucks............................................................. 5
4. Maximum permissible values for subbases and select materials.......................................... 9
5. Frost design soil classification.............................................................................................. 10
6. Frost-area soil support indexes of subgrade soils................................................................. 10
7. Gradation for aggregate surface courses............................................................................. 11
8. Compaction requirements for roads, cohesive soils............................................................. 11
9. Compaction requirements for roads, cohesionless soils....................................................... 12
10. Compaction requirements for airfields................................................................................. 12
1
TM 5-822-12
DESIGN OF AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADS AND AIRFIELDS
1. Purpose Group 2. Two-axle trucks.
Group 3. Three-, four-, and five-axle trucks.
This manual presents the procedures for design of Traffic composition will then be grouped in the following
aggregate surfaced roads and airfields. categories:
2. Scope Category I. Traffic composed primarily of
passenger cars, panel and pickup trucks (Group 1
This manual presents criteria for determining the vehicles), and containing not more than 1 percent two
thickness, material, and compaction requirements for all axle trucks (Group 2 vehicles).
classes of aggregate surfaced roads and for Class I, II,
and III airfields at US Army installations. Road classes Category II. Traffic composed primarily of
are defined in TM 5-822-2, and airfield classes are passenger cars, panel and pickup trucks (Group 1
defined in TM 5-803-4. Class IV Army airfields would vehicles), and containing as much as 10 percent two-
normally be paved. Use of the term roads includes axle trucks (Group 2 vehicles). No trucks having three
roads, streets, open storage areas, and parking areas. or more axles (Group 3 vehicles) are permitted in this
Use of the term airfields includes heliports, runways, category.
taxiways, and parking aprons. Design requirements are
presented for frost and nonfrost areas. Category III. Traffic containing as much as 15
percent trucks, but with not more than 1 percent of the
3. References total traffic composed of trucks having three or more
axles (Group 3 vehicles).
Publications cited in this manual are listed in appendix
A. Category IV. Traffic containing as much as 25
percent trucks, but with not more than 10 percent of the
4. Design of aggregate surfaced roads total traffic composed of trucks having three or more
axles (Group 3 vehicles).
a. Procedures. The thickness design of aggregate
surfaced roads is similar to the design of flexible Category IVA. Traffic containing more than 25
pavement roads as contained in TM 5-822-5. This percent trucks or more than 10 percent trucks having
procedure involves assigning a class to the road being three or more axles (Group 3 vehicles).
designed based upon the number of vehicles per day. A
design category is then assigned to the traffic from d. Tracked vehicles and forklift trucks. Tracked
which a design index is determined. This design index vehicles having gross weights not exceeding 15,000
is used with figure 1 to select the thickness (minimum of pounds and forklift trucks having gross weights not
4 inches) of aggregate required above a soil with a exceeding 6,000 pounds may be treated as two-axle
given strength expressed in terms of California Bearing trucks (Group 2 vehicles) in determining the design
Ratio (CBR) for nonfrost areas or in terms of a frost area index. Tracked vehicles having gross weights
soil support index (FASSI) in frost areas. exceeding 15,000 pounds but not 40,000 pounds and
forklift trucks having gross weights exceeding 6,000
b. Classes of roads. The classes of aggregate pounds but not 10,000 pounds may be treated as Group
surfaced roads vary from A to G. Selection of the 3 vehicles in determining the design index. Traffic
proper class depends upon the traffic intensity and is composed of tracked vehicles exceeding 40,000-pound
determined from table 1. gross weight and forklift trucks exceeding 10,000-pound
gross weight has been divided into the following three
c. Design index. The design of gravel roads will categories:
be based on a design index, which is an index
representing all traffic expected to use the road during Maximum Vehicle Gross Weight, pounds
its life. The design index is based on typical magnitudes Tracked Forklift
and compositions of traffic reduced to equivalents in Category Vehicles Trucks
terms of repetitions of an 18,000-pound single-axle, V 60,000 15,000
dual-wheel load. For designs involving rubber-tired VI 90,000 20,000
vehicles, traffic is classified in three groups as follows: VII 120,000 35,000
Group 1. Passenger cars and panel and pickup
trucks. e. Design index. The design index to be used in
designing a gravel road for the usual pneumatic-tired
vehicles will be selected from table 2.
3
TM 5-822-12
Figure 1. Thickness design curves for aggregate surfaced roads.
f. Roads for tracked vehicles. Roads sustaining g. Design life. The life assumed for design is 25
traffic of tracked vehicles weighing less than 40,000 years. For a design life less than 5 years, the design
pounds, and forklift trucks weighing less than 10,000 indexes in' tables 2 and 3 may be reduced by one.
pounds, will be designed in accordance with the Design indexes below three should not be reduced.
pertinent class and category from table 2. Roads
sustaining traffic of tracked vehicles, heavier than h. Entrances, exits, and segments. Regardless of
40,000 pounds, and forklift trucks heavier than 10,000 the design class selected for hardstands, special
pounds, will be designed in accordance with the traffic consideration should be given to the design of approach
intensity and category from table 3. roads, exit roads, and other heavily trafficked areas.
Failure or poor performance in these channelized traffic
areas
4
TM 5-822-12
Table 1. Criteria for selecting aggregate surface road consist of base and subbase material provided the top 6
class. inches meet the gradation requirements in paragraph 8.
Number
Road of Vehicles 5. Design of aggregate surfaced airfields
Class per day
The thickness design of aggregate surfaced airfields is
A 10,000
B 8,400-10,000 similar to the design of flexible pavement airfields as
C 6,300-8,400 contained in TM 5-825-2. This procedure involves
D 2,100-6,300 assigning a class to the airfield based upon the aircraft
E 210-2,100
controlling the design. Having selected the class of
F 70-210
airfield, the design is accomplished using figures 2
G under70
through 4.
Table 2. Design index for pneumatic-tired vehicles.
Design Index a. Classes of airfields. There are four classes of
Category Category Category Category Army airfields. These are Classes I-IV, although only
Class I II III IV Classes I-III are considered candidates for aggregate
A 3 4 5 6
surfacing. Each class of airfield is designed for a
B 3 4 5 6
standard loading condition and pass level as defined in
C 3 4 4 6
D 2 3 4 5 TM 5-803-4. Where necessary, airfields may be
E 1 2 3 4 designed for loads and pass levels other than the
F 1 1 2 3 standard, and the criteria herein provide thicknesses for
G 1 1 1 2
varying pass and load levels.
Table 3. Design index for tracked vehicles and forklift
b. Traffic areas. Army airfields are divided into
trucks.
traffic areas for design purposes. Type B traffic areas
Number of Vehicles per Day
consist of taxiways, the first 1,000 feet of runway ends,
Traffic (or Week as indicated)
Category 500 200 100 40 10 4 1 1 Per and aprons. Type C traffic areas are the interior
Week portions of the runway (between the 1,000 foot runway
V 8 7 6 6 5 5 5 - ends).
VI - 9 8 8 7 6 6 5
VII - - 10 10 9 8 7 6
c. Thickness criteria (nonfrost areas). Thickness
requirements for aggregate surfaced airfields are
often has greater impact than localized failure on the
determined from figures 2 through 4 for types B and C
hardstand itself. Since these areas will almost certainly
traffic areas. Thicknesses for type B areas are
be subjected to more frequent and heavier loads than
determined directly from the curves, and type C traffic
the hardstand, the design index used for the primary
areas are designed using 75 percent of the load used to
road should be used for entrances and exits to the
design type B traffic areas. The minimum thickness
hardstand. In the case of large hardstands having
requirement for all cases will be 4 inches. The figure for
multiple use and multiple entrances and exits,
the appropriate airfield class will be entered with the
consideration should be given to partitioning and using
subgrade CBR to determine the thickness required for a
different classes of design. The immediate benefits that
given load and pass level. The thickness determined
would accrue include economy through elimination of
from the figure may be constructed of compacted
overdesign in some areas and better organization of
granular fill for the total depth over the natural subgrade
vehicles and equipment.
or in a layered system of granular fill and compacted
i. Thickness criteria (nonfrost areas). Thickness subgrade for the same total depth. The layered section
should be checked to ensure that an adequate thickness
requirements for aggregate surfaced roads are
of material is used to protect the underlying layer based
determined from figure 1 for a given soil strength and
upon the CBR of the underlying layer. The granular fill
design index. The minimum thickness requirement will
may consist of base and subbase material provided the
be 4 inches. Figure 1 will be entered with the CBR of
top 6 inches meet the gradation requirements of
the subgrade to determine the thickness of aggregate
paragraph 8.
required for the appropriate design index. The thickness
determined from the figure may be constructed of
6. Design CBR for select materials and subbases
compacted granular fill for the total depth over the
Design CBR values and materials requirements for
natural subgrade or in a layered system of granular fill
select materials and subbases are to be selected in
(including subbases) and compacted subgrade for the
accordance with TM 5-825-2 except as modified in table
same total depth. The layered section should be
4.
checked to ensure that an adequate thickness of
material is used to protect the underlying layer based on
the CBR of the underlying layer. The granular fill may
5
TM 5-822-12
Figure 2. Aggregate surfacing design curve for Class I airfields.
7. Frost area considerations a. Required thickness. Where frost susceptible
In areas where frost effects have an impact on the subgrades are encountered, the section thickness
design of pavements, additional considerations required will be determined according to the reduced
concerning thicknesses and required layers in the subgrade strength method. The reduced subgrade
pavement structure must be addressed. The specific strength method requires the use of frost area soil
areas where frost has an impact on the design are support indexes listed in table 6. Frost-area soil support
discussed in the following paragraphs; however, a more indexes are used as if they were CBR values; the term
detailed discussion of frost effects is presented in TM 5- CBR is not applied to them, however, because, being
818-2. For frost design purposes, soils have been weighted average values for an annual cycle, their
divided into eight groups as shown in table 5. Only the values cannot be determined by CBR tests. Figures 1
nonfrostsusceptible (NFS) group is suitable for base through 4 are entered with the soil support indexes in
course. NFS, S1, or S2 soils may be used for subbase place of CBR values to determine the required section
course, and any of the eight groups may be encountered thickness.
as subgrade soils. Soils are listed in approximate order
of decreasing bearing capability during periods of thaw.
6