332 final project

8/2/2019 332 Final Project

1/27

The Pennsylvania State University

Department of Civil Engineering

CE 321: Highway Engineering

Dr. Paul Jovanis

Scott Himes E.I.T.Section 2

Preliminary Rural Collector Design

George Saad

April 13, 2012


2/27

Table of Contents

Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1

Digital Terrain Modeling -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1

Horizontal Alignment ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2

Vertical Alignment --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3

Cross Section and Earthwork -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3

Comparison of Alignments ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 4

Conclusion -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5

Appendix A ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6

Appendix B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13

Appendix C ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19

List of Drawings ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24


3/27


4/27

Introduction

The goal of this project is to design two alternate route designs for a rural collector from PA SR

999 near Tobymines to a newly constructed freeway exit. There needs to be an east and west

alternative that will end up intersecting the freeway exit at the same location. The routes are to follow

the guidelines of the Green Book by minimizing and avoiding impacts with state forests, existing

communities, and agricultural land. Such things are to be taken into consideration when designing the

routes to try and minimize the cost of the two alternatives. The following report will include a layout of

the two alternatives along with all the factors that affect the total cost of each alternative. This will aid

in choosing which alternative is best to use for the final design and continuing on to the construction

stage. This report will be broken down into Digital terrain modeling, horizontal alignment, vertical

alignment, cross section and earthwork, and the comparison of the alignments.

Digital Terrain Modeling

The digital terrain model contains contour lines and elevations of the earth. It also shows the

agriculture, state forests, and the buildings which are trying to be avoided when designing the alternates

to minimize their cost. The digital terrain modeling process has certain design specifications for both the

east and west alternatives. The design criteria for the alternatives that needed to be taken into

consideration before selecting route patterns are as follows:

Design speed: 45 mph Maximum super elevation (e max): 8% Travel way width: 12 Shoulder width: 8 Clear zone width (beyond shoulder): 10 Maximum grade: 8% Minimum grade: 0.5%

Refer to sheet three of seven in the drawings section to see the typical cross section showing the travel

width, shoulder width, and clear zone.The calculations for the K values for the crest and sag curves were calculated using the equation

K=L/A. K is the horizontal distance required to effect a 1% change in slope and L is the length. For

example the calculation to get the K value for the first sag curve in the east alternative is 400/ (8.03-3) =

79.5. The absolute value of the algebraic difference in grades is the A value which is the 8.03% -3%. The

calculation for the K value for the first crest curve in the east alternative was found by 800/ (8.03+4.61)


5/27

= 63.29. Refer to sheet four of seven in the drawings section to view the values of the east alternative.

Similarly the K values for the west alternative and can be found in sheet six of seven in the drawings

section. The minimum radius for safe vehicle operation is R = 600ft and can be calculated by using the

equation e + fs = V2 / 15*R. The known values are e = 0.08, V=45mph, fs=0.145 which is found from

Table 3.5 in the Highway Engineering and Traffic Analysis book. Therefore R = [(0.08 + 0.145)*(452)]/15 =

600 ft. The minimum R values were exceeded which increases the K value and the vertical curve

lengths were rounded up to the nearest 50 to ensure safety of the road.

Horizontal Alignment

The horizontal alignment is the horizontal curve which focuses on the design of the directional

transition of the roadway in a horizontal plane. When designing the horizontal alignment for the east

and west alternatives it is important to avoid major changes in the elevation of the land and avoidingshort turns so that cars can safely make the turns on the road. The topographic and environmental

features also need to be taken into consideration along with the fact that the alignments are being

designed on rolling terrain. The purpose is to make the best design possible by making the alternatives

conform to the natural contours while following the specified design criteria for safety.

The design criteria used for both the east and west alternatives are the same as those bulleted

in the digital terrain design section. The average daily traffic for the western alternative is 2,500 vehicles

per day and is 1,500 vehicles per day for the eastern alternative. Some improved safety operations and

other requirements are:

Maximum grade within 200 of an intersection: 3% Every attempt should be made to have as near a 90-degree intersection angel with SR999 and

the final tangent bearing should match the bearing of the existing interstate cross street.

Minimum tangent length of 200 Minimum curve length of 100 Each alternative should have a minimum of five and maximum of ten horizontal curves

The curve radii used for both the east and west alternative horizontal alignments either meet or

exceed the minimum radius requirements of 600 which can be found in Appendix A under circular curve

data. The minimum tangent length of 200 and minimum curve length of 100 are also met in both the

east and west horizontal alignments. This information can also be found by referencing Appendix A.

The number of curves on the east alignment is nine and can be seen by referencing the table with curve

numbers on sheet one of seven. The number of curves on the west alignment is six and is labeled as


6/27

curves ten through fifteen. This information for the west horizontal alignment can be found on sheet

two of seven. By meeting all of the requirements it ensures that the horizontal alignments will be safe.

Vertical Alignment

The vertical alignment specifies the elevation of points along the roadway. These points are also

known as control points which are made to ensure the grade of the road fits the specifications of the

vertical alignment which are:

Minimum vertical curve length: 100 Maximum grade: 8% Minimum grade: 0.5% Maximum grade within 500 of and intersection: 3% Clearance above streams: 5ft

When designing these alignments the grades of the line need to be taken into consideration

when selecting the control points. These points create a vertical curve above and below the existing

ground line. When designing the curve it is important to try and make the amount of cut equal to the

amount of fill for cost purposes. The start point and end point of the finished ground line should be the

same of the existing ground line although this is not the case for my east alternative because the grade

had to meet the minimum 0.5% grade. Sheet four of seven shows the grades of the east alternative

along with the six curves that it has while sheet six of seven shows the grades and four curves on the

west alternative.

When designing the vertical alignment the K value for crest curves had to be set to 61 and the K

value for sag curves had to be set to 79 to meet the AASHTO Greenbook standards. The east and west

alignments meet the minimum and maximum grade requirements along with the five foot clearance

above the streams. To meet criteria, curve lengths had to be rounded up so they were in multiples of

50. Grade values, along with sag and crest length information can be found in Appendix B for both the

east and west vertical alignment.

Cross Section and Earth Work

Since the east and west vertical alignments are known the cross sections need to be created to

see how the alternatives level out to the existing ground line. This is done by adding the traveled way,

shoulder, and clear zone which need to follow the following criteria:

Traveled Way


7/27

Width: 12 Lanes Normal crown at 2%

Shoulder

Width: 8 Slope: 4%

Clear Zone

Width (beyond shoulder): 10 Slope: 4%

After applying these requirements to the two alternatives, the footprint is created which can

show any impacts that the road encountered. Neither the east nor the west footprint impacted any

forest or agriculture but the west footprint impacted four buildings. Finally the cross sections for both

alternatives are created and recorded over every 100. The cross sections measure the area of cut and

fill for each alternative to calculate the amount of earthwork that needs to be done.

The max cut and max fill cross sections for the east alignment can be found on sheet five of

seven. There was not a cross section with both cut and fill for this alternative which is why there are

only two cross sections recorded on the drawing. The cross sections displaying the max cut, max fill, and

cross sections with both cut and fill for the west alignment can be reference on sheet seven of seven.

Since the ratio of cumulative volumes for fill to cut for the east alternative is roughly 1:1, the amount of

earthwork is acceptable for this alternative. The ratio of cumulative volumes for fill to cut for the west

alternative is 1.25:1, making the earthwork more expensive but still acceptable. These ratios indicate

that the earthwork is reasonably balanced for both the east and west alternatives but the overall cubic

volume for them could be reduced. The values for the earthwork can be found in Table 1 and Table 2 of

Appendix C.

Comparison of Alignments

Many factors come into play when choosing which alternative is the best design. Some of these

factors include the length, earthwork volumes, foot print area, environmental impacts, and buildings

displaced. The length of the east alternative was 23,725.87 ft and the west alignment was 19,004.03 ft,

yielding a difference of 4,721.84 ft. These lengths can be found in Appendix C on Table 3 for the east

length and Table 4 for the west length. Another factor that can affect the contractors choice is the

earthwork volumes of the alignments. The east alternative consisted of 2,056,385.28 cubic yards of cut

and 2,150,486.94 cubic yards of fill (Reference Table 1 in Appendix C). This difference causes an excess

borrow of fill of 94,101.66 which adds to the cost of the east alternative (Reference Table 3 Appendix C).


8/27

The west alternative consisted of 2,535,139.50 cubic yards of cut and 3,186,547.08 cubic yards of fill

(Reference Table 2 in Appendix C). Like the east alignment, the west alignment also has an excess

borrow of fill which was 833,407.58 cubic yards of fill (Reference Table 4 in Appendix C).

Another factor that compares the two alignments is the footprint area. This area show the

finished grade of the road where and impacts with forests and agriculture can be shown. Neither the

east nor the west alternative impacted with forests of agriculture. Therefore, the total impact of the

area was equal to the undeveloped area which was 129.413 acres for the east alternative and 118.205

acres for the west (Reference Table 5 in Appendix C). There were no buildings impacted by the east

alternative and four buildings were impacted by the west alternative which can be shown in Table 3 and

Table 4 in Appendix C. Undeveloped, state forest, agriculture, and buildings were types of right away

that factored into the cost of acquisition.

Overall the total cost for the east alternative was cheaper at $33,437,757.92 while the westalternative total cost was $47,481,345.26. The sections that the total cost is broken down into are

earthwork, pavement, and acquisition and can be found in Table 6 in Appendix C. The west alternative

was shorter than the east and also had smaller changes in grade of elevation which yield less of a delay.

The east alternative also uses near eight percent grades for a much longer length than the west yielding

a longer delay. When rivers were crossed they were done so as close to 90 degrees as possible.

Although the west alignment is shorter in length and uses smaller grades it has a greater excavation and

impacts four buildings which boost the cost up tremendously. With a very well balanced cut to fill ratio

and no impacts, the lower cost for the east alignment is validated.

Conclusion

From the data analysis the east alternative was the most cost efficient alternative and is the best

for the job (Refer to Table 6 in Appendix C). Both alternatives follow the grade requirements in the

vertical alignments. Realistically the west alignment has an average lower grade percentage and but the

due to the large uneven balance of cut and fill it makes the cost of the alternative about $14,000,000

greater than the east. To be more cost efficient, the vertical alignment for both alternatives could

follow the existing ground terrains closer. The impacts were minimal for each alternative besides the

four buildings that west alternative came in contact with. The horizontal alignment was chosen well but

the vertical alignment could be improved to minimize the cost of the earthwork because this is

ultimately the major contributing factor to the total cost of construction.


9/27

Appendix A

(Horizontal Curve Reports)


10/27

Land Tech Engineering

412 Wagner Street

Suite #231

Wexford, PA 15090

Alignment Curve Report Client: Scott Himes

Project Name: Alternative Routes Project Description:

Report Date: 4/13/2012 Prepared by: George Saad

Alignment: EAST-Alignment

Description:

Tangent Data

Length: 674.557 Course: N 24 26' 46.6229" E

Circular Curve Data

Delta: 08 07' 49.7458" Type: RIGHT

Radius: 704.703 DOC: 08 07' 49.7460"

Length: 100.000 Tangent: 50.084

Mid-Ord: 1.773 External: 1.778

Chord: 99.916 Course: N 28 30' 41.4958" E

Tangent Data

Length: 1638.391 Course: N 32 34' 36.3687" E

Circular Curve Data

Delta: 43 17' 19.0446" Type: LEFT


11/27

Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 442.612 Course: N 10 55' 56.8465" E

Tangent Data

Length: 2697.131 Course: N 10 42' 42.6758" W

Circular Curve Data


Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 380.718 Course: N 07 47' 08.7366" E

Tangent Data

Length: 2656.172 Course: N 26 17' 00.1490" E

Circular Curve Data


Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 302.341 Course: N 40 52' 34.8420" E

Tangent Data

Length: 1278.033 Course: N 55 28' 09.5350" E

Circular Curve Data

Delta: 63 12' 22.7315" Type: LEFT

Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"


12/27



Chord: 628.839 Course: N 23 51' 58.1693" E

Tangent Data

Length: 2300.628 Course: N 07 44' 13.1964" W

Circular Curve Data

Delta: 46 20' 56.4085" Type: LEFT

Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 472.239 Course: N 30 54' 41.4007" W

Tangent Data

Length: 1173.698 Course: N 54 05' 09.6050" W

Circular Curve Data


Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 194.230 Course: N 44 46' 16.4634" W

Tangent Data

Length: 5001.560 Course: N 35 27' 23.3219" W

Circular Curve Data

Delta: 29 26' 56.4138" Type: LEFT

Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



13/27


Chord: 305.006 Course: N 50 10' 51.5288" W

Tangent Data

Length: 2127.297 Course: N 64 54' 19.7357" W

Circular Curve Data


Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 108.463 Course: N 59 43' 10.9174" W

Tangent Data

Length: 1172.693 Course: N 54 32' 02.0991" W

Alignment: WEST-Alignment

Description:

Tangent Data

Length: 3822.486 Course: N 34 06' 49.1628" W

Circular Curve Data


Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 351.984 Course: N 17 03' 24.5814" W


14/27

Tangent Data

Length: 465.518 Course: N 00 00' 00.0000" E

Tangent Data

Length: 573.967 Course: N 00 00' 00.0000" E

Circular Curve Data


Radius: 1086.142 DOC: 05 16' 30.5853"



Chord: 99.965 Course: N 02 38' 15.2926" E

Tangent Data

Length: 507.501 Course: N 05 16' 30.5851" E

Circular Curve Data

Delta: 10 49' 51.7652" Type: LEFT

Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 113.254 Course: N 00 08' 25.2975" W

Tangent Data

Length: 2816.051 Course: N 05 33' 21.1801" W

Circular Curve DataDelta: 09 58' 39.7401" Type: RIGHT

Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"




15/27

Chord: 104.354 Course: N 00 34' 01.3101" W

Tangent Data

Length: 6205.491 Course: N 04 25' 18.5599" E

Circular Curve Data


Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 101.423 Course: N 09 16' 12.6389" E

Tangent Data

Length: 1539.522 Course: N 14 07' 06.7178" E

Circular Curve Data


Radius: 600.000 DOC: 09 32' 57.4680"



Chord: 260.883 Course: N 26 40' 30.0967" E

Tangent Data

Length: 2033.817 Course: N 39 13' 53.4755" E


16/27

Appendix B

(Vertical Curve Reports)


17/27

Profile Vertical Curve Report

Client: Prepared by:

Scott Himes George Saad

CE 312 Land Tech Engineering

123 Main Street 412 Wagner Street

Date: 4/13/2012

Vertical Alignment: EAST -Profile

Description:

Station Range: Start: 10+00.00, End: 247+25.87

Vertical Curve Information:(sag curve)

PVC Station: 22+47.32 Elevation: 1,682.266'

PVI Station: 24+47.32 Elevation: 1,688.266'

PVT Station: 26+47.32 Elevation: 1,704.329'

Low Point: 22+47.32 Elevation: 1,682.266'

Grade in(%): 3.00% Grade out(%): 8.03%

Change(%): 5.03% K: 79.499'

Curve Length: 400.000' Curve Radius 7,949.891'

Headlight Distance: 364.721'

Vertical Curve Information:(crest curve)




High Point: 44+03.79 Elevation: 1,824.986'

Grade in(%): 8.03% Grade out(%): -4.61%

Change(%): 12.64% K: 63.293'


18/27


Passing Distance: 442.432' Stopping Distance: 290.044'






Grade in(%): -4.61% Grade out(%): -1.52%

Change(%): 3.09% K: 80.951'








Grade in(%): -1.52% Grade out(%): 2.58%

Change(%): 4.10% K: 85.443'








19/27



Change(%): 7.25% K: 62.032'









Change(%): 5.18% K: 86.907'



Vertical Alignment: WEST-Profile

Description:

Station Range: Start: 10+00.00, End: 200+03.78








20/27

Change(%): 1.80% K: 83.304'


Headlight Distance: 6,077.692'







Change(%): 0.35% K: 141.092'


Passing Distance: 4,388.580' Stopping Distance: 1,900.322'



PVI Station: 152+66.55 Elevation: 1,546.689'PVT Station: 154+66.55 Elevation: 1,552.636'



Change(%): 4.53% K: 88.350'







21/27




Change(%): 4.86% K: 61.728'




22/27

Appendix C

(Spreadsheets for cost estimation and earthwork)


23/27

Table 1. Earthwork volume for Alternative A (East Alternative)

Station

Areas (Square Feet) Volumes (Cubic Yards) Cumulative Volumes

Cut Fill Cut Fill Cut Fill

20+00 1086.66 0

30+00 364.6546 0 26,876.13 0 26,876.13 0

40+00 165.7866 0 9,822.99 0 36,699.12 0

50+00 372.1166 0 9,961.17 0 46,660.29 0

60+00 3585.847 0 73,295.62 0 119,955.91 0

70+00 22773.1508 0 488,129.59 0 608,085.50 0

80+00 1229.6758 0 444,496.79 0 1,052,582.29 0

90+00 0 15842.4109 22,771.77 293,377.98 1,075,354.06 293,377.98

100+00 0 8573.1491 0.00 452,140.00 1,075,354.06 745,517.98

110+00 3299.4113 0 61,100.21 158,762.02 1,136,454.27 904,280.00

120+00 0 5300.1499 61,100.21 98,150.92 1,197,554.48 1,002,430.92

130+00 1089.1608 0 20,169.64 98,150.92 1,217,724.12 1,100,581.85

140+00 0 13866.4424 20,169.64 256,785.97 1,237,893.77 1,357,367.82

150+00 0 3199.7277 0.00 316,040.19 1,237,893.77 1,673,408.01

160+00 19210.7623 0 355,754.86 59,254.22 1,593,648.62 1,732,662.22

170+00 760.9565 0 369,846.64 0.00 1,963,495.27 1,732,662.22

180+00 943.9539 0 31,572.41 0.00 1,995,067.68 1,732,662.22

190+00 1183.5981 0 39,399.11 0.00 2,034,466.79 1,732,662.22

200+00 0 655.1329 21,918.48 12,132.09 2,056,385.28 1,744,794.31

210+00 0 453.8788 0.00 20,537.25 2,056,385.28 1,765,331.57

220+00 0 6281.5511 0.00 124,730.18 2,056,385.28 1,890,061.75

230+00 0 1488.5433 0.00 143,890.64 2,056,385.28 2,033,952.39

240+00 0 4804.3227 0.00 116,534.56 2,056,385.28 2,150,486.94

Total Volumes 2,056,385.28 2,150,486.94


24/27

Table 2. Earthwork volume fo Alternative B (West Alternative)

Station

Areas (Square Feet) Volumes (Cubic Yards) Cumulative Volumes

Cut Fill Cut Fill Cut Fill

20+00 2450.5104 0

30+00 26080.1005 0 528,344.65 0 207,950.26 0

40+00 11924.8004 0 703,794.46 0 911,744.72 0

50+00 0 446.1008 220,829.64 0 1,132,574.36 0

60+00 6001.4284 0 111,137.56 0 1,243,711.92 0

70+00 92.8856 0 112,857.67 0 1,356,569.59 0

80+00 0 5174.5255 1,720.10 0 1,358,289.69 0

90+00 0 3705.6418 0.00 164,447.54 1,358,289.69 293,382.29

100+00 0 4454.7525 0.00 151,118.41 1,358,289.69 444,500.70

110+00 2322.9137 0 43,016.92 82,495.42 1,401,306.61 526,996.12

120+00 10542.8908 0 238,255.64 0.00 1,639,562.25 526,996.12

130+00 7670.0367 0 337,276.44 0.00 1,976,838.69 526,996.12

140+00 4750.3256 0 230,006.71 0.00 2,206,845.40 526,996.12

150+00 6452.6464 0 207,462.44 0.00 2,414,307.84 526,996.12

160+00 0 3643.5314 119,493.45 67,472.80 2,533,801.29 594,468.92

170+00 0 54471.9187 0.00 1,076,212.04 2,533,801.29 1,670,680.96

180+00 0 12484.1536 0.00 1,239,927.26 2,533,801.29 2,910,608.23

190+00 0 1204.064 0.00 253,485.51 2,533,801.29 3,164,093.74

200+00 72.263 8.4167 1,338.20 22,453.35 2,535,139.50 3,186,547.08

Total Volumes 2,535,139.50 3,186,547.08


25/27

Table 3. Cost Estimate for East Alignment

East Alternative

Earthwork

Work Volume Unit Cost Total Cost

Excavation 2,056,385.28 $13.18 $27,103,157.99

Haul away cost 0 $7.03 $0.00

Excess Borrow(fill) 94,101.66 $9.98 $939,134.57

Total Earthwork Cost $28,042,292.56

Pavement

Pavement Length(ft) Cost Total Cost

23,725.87 $141.50 $3,357,210.61

Right of Way Acquistion

Right of Way Type Unit Cost Acres Total Cost

Undeveloped $15,750 129.413 $2,038,254.75

State Forest $185,140 0 $0.00

Agriculture $1,250,000 0 $0.00

Buildings $300,000 0 $0.00

Total Cost for Right of Way Acquisition $2,038,254.75


26/27

Table 4. Cost Estimate for West Alignment

West Alternative

Earthwork

Work Volume Unit Cost Total Cost

Excavation 2,535,139.50 $13.18 $33,413,138.61Haul away cost 0.00 $7.03 $0.00

Excess Borrow(fill) 833,407.58 $9.98 $8,317,407.65

Total Earthwork Cost $41,730,546.26

Pavement

Pavement Length(ft) Cost Total Cost

19,004.03 $141.50 $2,689,070.25

Right of Way Acquistion

Right of Way Type Unit Cost Acres Total Cost

Undeveloped $15,750 118.205 $1,861,728.75

State Forest $185,140 0 $0.00

Agriculture $1,250,000 0 $0.00

Buildings $300,000 4 $1,200,000.00

Total Cost for Right of Way

Acquisition$3,061,728.75

Table 5. Impact of Area

Land Feature

Impact of East alternative

(Acre)

Impact of West alternative

(Acre)

Forest 0 0

Undeveloped 129.413 118.205

Agriculture 0 0

Total 129.413 118.205

Table 6. Design Analysis

Design Analysis Summary

Alternative Earthwork Pavement Acquisition Total Cost

East $28,042,292.56 $3,357,210.61 $2,038,254.75 $33,437,757.92

West $41,730,546.26 $2,689,070.25 $3,061,728.75 $47,481,345.26


27/27

List of Drawings

East Horizontal Alignment ------------------------------------------------------------- 1 of 7

West Horizontal Alignment ------------------------------------------------------------- 2 of 7

Typical Cross - Section ------------------------------------------------------------------ 3 of 7

Profile for East Alternative ------------------------------------------------------------- 4 of 7

Cross Sections for East Alternative ---------------------------------------------------- 5 of 7

Profile for West Alternative ------------------------------------------------------------- 6 of 7

Cross Sections for West Alternative --------------------------------------------------- 7 of 7

332 final project

Documents