final report - odisha _road.pdf · 2019-03-15 · and blocks spread across the state to prepare a...

FINAL REPORT

On

TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF CEMENT

CONCRETE ROADS

Submitted to

Planning & Coordination Department

GOVERNMENT OF ODISHA

Prepared by

School of Infrastructure

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

BHUBANESWAR

February 2016

1

CONTENTS

Section Description Page No.

1 Introduction 1

2 Background 2

3 Objectives of this Study 5

4 Methodology 5

5 Selection of Roads 5

6 Detailed Methodology 12

7 Field Investigations 19

8 Laboratory Investigations 28

9 Analysis of Results 30

10 Conclusions and Recommendatios 39

11 Photograpghs 41

2

1. INTRODUCTION

Government of Odisha has constructed large number of concrete roads (rigid pavement) through

Panchayati Raj Department in the village areas across the state for providing connectivity to various

habitations under different blocks and Tehsils. It has been observed that some of these concrete

roads have lost their functional and structural performance and therefore unable to provide the

desired level of services for the socio‐economic upliftment to the targeted population due to variety

of reasons.

Therefore, taking into account the huge investment made for development of such roads, the

Planning and Coordination (P&C) Department, Government of Odisha has decided to evaluate the

quality of implementation of these roads. Also, the Government wanted to assess the advantages of

these concrete roads over similar type of bituminous roads. In this regard, IIT Bhubaneswar has been

entrusted for carrying out the Technical Evaluation of these roads (vide letter No. 8262 Dated

04.07.2015). A contract was signed between both the parties on 29th October 2015 in the office of

the Director (DF&C)‐cum‐Additional Secretary to Government, P & C Department, Govt. of Odisha.

The investigating team from IIT Bhubaneswar visted different road sections in the identified districts

and blocks spread across the state to prepare a list of 12 CC roads and 12 bituminous roads for

taking up the evaluation study. The report presents a detailed methodology of the evaluation

process, investigations results, discussions, conclusions and recommendations.

2. BACKGROUND

The Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Odisha have taken initiative in the past for

construction of Cement Concrete (CC) roads in the villages through various major funding schemes

like Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF), Gopabandhu Gramin Yojana (GGY) and Finance

Commission Award (FCA) in order to improve the quality of life and hygienic conditions in the

villages.

Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF) was implemented in 19 districts of Odisha. Construction of

Cement Concrete Roads is a major activity being taken up under the scheme. The minimum amount

given to a village is Rs. 2 Lakh.

Gopabandhu Gramin Yojana (GGY) provides development assistance to 11 non‐BRGF districts.A

village is entitled to get Rs. 3 to 15 Lakh depending upon its population.

3

CC Road under Finance Commission Award (FCA): Panchayati Raj Institutes (PRIs) receive funds under

Finance Commission Grant for operation and maintenance of water supply and for improving

sanitation in villages. Construction of CC road with drain is a major activity that has been taken up in

the villages for improving sanitation under this scheme. A Panchayat gets between Rs. 2.62 Lakh to

3.20 Lakh depending upon population during a year.

Apart of these major schemes, CC roads have also been constructed through vaious other schemens

such as RLTAP, Biju KBK/ Kandhamal/ Gajapati, MLALAD, MPLAD, WODC, IAP, ITDA Grants, FDR Grant

etc. Considering the large scale demand of CC roads in the State, the department launched a

dedicated scheme called “Cement Concrete Road” in 2010‐11. The focus was on construction of CC

roads in SC/ST/PVTG habitations. A village is entitled to get an amount between 3 to 7 Lakh

depending upon its population.

2.1. Guidelines issued for construction of CC roads

As per the initial guidelines, DRDAs were following standard specification of 3 meter width and 7

inches (175 mm) thickness of concrete layer (75‐100 mm 1:2:4 plain cement concrete over 100 mm

1:3:6 plain cement concrete) over 100 mm of sand for construction of such roads, which cost Rs. 32‐

33 lakhs per Km. as per the prevailing prices.

The following guidelines were issued during the initial phases of the scheme:

The width of the road shall be 3‐3.5 meters with expansion joint on each 5 meters interval.

During casting of concrete like C.C. (1:3:6) (metal concrete) & C.C. (1:2:4) (chips concrete)

plate vibrator shall be used. Without plate vibrator no casting of concrete will be made.

If the length of the road is more than 100 meter then 8‐10 tons roller shall be used for

compacting the sub‐base.

Efforts should be made for 3% cambering of the road.

Minimum seven days curing for the concrete road shall be made and the concerned JE/GPTA

has to ensure it.

The concerned JE/GPTA shall verify the site personally and accordingly prepare the drawing

of the concrete road as per the approved plan.

During casting of concrete the concerned JE/ GPTA shall be personally present on the

worksite and as per his or her direction mixture of concrete will be prepared.

The Assistant Engineer of Block shall visit at least once to every concrete road during casting

of C.C. (1:3:6) & C.C. (1:2:4).

4

In a recent guideline issued in 2013 by Panchayati Raj Department, few changes in the cross section

have been made with respect to the earlier design practices. Detailed drawings as per the revised

guidelines are given in Fig.1 and Fig.2. The guidelines released in this regard are given in Annexure‐I.

Fig. 1: Typical Cross Section of CC Roads in Black Cotton Soil Area

Fig. 2: Typical Cross Section of CC Roads in Hard Soil Area

5

3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

With the background as discussed earlier, the objectives of the present study are:

Structural Evaluation of the Selected road sections

Distress identification and mapping

Functional evaluation of roads

Drainage performance

Life Cycle cost analysis and comparison of Bituminous (BT) and CC roads

Suggest measures for improvement in CC road constructions

4. METHODOLOGY

Pavement evaluation is generally carried out in two ways; i.e. Structural and Functional.

1. The following procedure will be adopted for Structural evaluation of the road sections:

Residual Strength estimation by cutting cores and determination of its compressive

strength

Non‐destructive testing of concrete roads using Rebound Hammer

Test pits for BT roads and evaluation of materials used

2. The following procedure will be adopted for Functional evaluation of the road sections:

Distress Identification

Distress mapping

Roughness measurement using Roughometer

3. Drainage performance evaluation

4. Life Cycle Cost Analysis of the pavements considering the following costs:

Construction Cost

Maintenance cost

Service period

5. SELECTION OF ROADS

A total of 24 roads (12 CC and 12 BT surfaced) have been selected from the three revenue divisions

selecting one district from each based on number of completed CC road projects. Two blocks from

each district were also identified in consultation with Panchayti Raj Department for carrying out this

study.

6

5.1. Identified Districts and Blocks

Based on the maximum number of completed projects, three districts have been identified by

Panchayati Raj Department with one from each revenue division (RD) as given below:

1. Cuttack

2. Keonjhar

3. Kalahandi

Four blocks (2 with max. coverage and 2 with min. coverage) from each sample district have been

identified for carrying out this study. The details of the selected sites are given below in Table‐1:

Table‐1: District and Blocks Selected for this Study

Division District Block

Max Coverage Min Coverage

Central Cuttack Athagarh Banki‐Dampada

Mahanga Niali

Northern Keonjhar Anandpur Jhumpura

Ghatagaon Harichandanpur

Southern Kalahandi Kesinga Golamunda

Thuamul Rampur Koksara

7

Fig.3. Map Showing the Study Area in Cuttack District

ATHAGARH

MAHANGA

BANKI‐DAMPADA

NIALI

8

Fig.4. Map Showing the Study Area in Keonjhar District

JHUMPURA

GHATAGAON

ANANDPUR

HARICHANDANPUR

9

Fig.5. Map Showing the Study Area in Kalahandi District

KESINGA

THUAMUL RAMPUR

KOKASARA

GOLAMUNDA

10

5.2. Road Sections

The following roads have been finaised for carrying out this study:

District: Cuttack

Block: Athagarh

CC Road: Khuntakata Internal Village Road, GP‐Khuntakata

BT Road: PWD Road to Badabhuin, GP‐Badabhuin

Block: Mahanga

CC Road: Kuhunda Internal Village Road, GP‐Kuhunda

BT Road: PWD Road to Basudevbpur, GP‐Basudevpur

Block: Niali

CC Road: Nuasatanga Village CC road, GP‐ Krushnaprasad

BT Road: Krushnaprasad to Tampada, GP‐ Krushnaprasad

Block: Banki‐Dampada

CC Road: MDR‐77 (Kalika Prasad) to Muraripur, GP‐Partapur

BT Road: RD Road to Brahmania, GP‐Gadjit

District: Keonjhar

Block: Anandpur

CC Road: NH215 to Kolimati Village (CC portion),GP‐Kolimati

BT Road: NH215 to Kolimati Village (BT portion), GP‐Kolimati

Block: Ghatagaon

CC Road: Bhalukipatala Internal Village Road,GP‐Bholabeda

BT Road: Bholabeda to Balukipatala,GP‐Bholabeda

Block: Jhumpura

CC Road: Durgapur to Bhaluka Nala,GP‐Arsala

BT Road: Arsala to Chauthia,GP‐Arsala

Block: Harichandanpur

CC Road: Dehuri Sahi to Juanga Sahi (CC portion),GP‐Rebana

BT Road: Dehuri Sahi to Juanga Sahi (BT portion),GP‐Rebana

11

District: Kalahandi

Block: Kesinga

CC Road: NH to Kasurpada Village Road, GP‐Kasurpada

BT Road: Kokomunda to Gokuleswar, GP‐Gokuleswar

Block: Thuamul Rampur

CC Road: Peramanji to Adibasi Pada , GP‐KarlaPada

BT Road: Srimaska to Sindhipadar,GP‐Sindhipadar

Block: Golamunda

CC Road: Faranga Internal Village Road, GP‐Faranga

BT Road: Faranga to Kumbhari, GP‐Faranga

Block: Kokasara

CC Road: NH26 to Gountiapada,GP‐ Barahadanga

BT Road: NH26 to Kundaguda, GP‐Ampani

12

6. DETAILED METHODOLOGY

6.1. Measurement of Roughness

Pavement roughness is generally defined as an expression of irregularities in the pavement surface

that adversely affect the ride quality of a vehicle. Roughness of pavement surface can be measured

using different equipment such as Merlin, Response type road roughness meters, Profilographs etc.

Response type road roughness meters (RTRRMs) provide indirect measure of longitudinal road

profile. These systems measure the response of a vehicle to the road surface. A response type road

roughness meter is an instrument mounted in a vehicle to monitor pavement roughness. It records

the displacement of the vehicle chassis relative to the rear axle per unit distance travelled, usually in

terms of counts per kilometer or meters per kilometer. In this study, the Australian Road Research

Board (ARRB) make Roughometer‐III (as shown in Fig. 6) has been used for determination of

roughness of the road surfaces.

Fig.6. ARRB Make Roughometer‐III

Main Features of Roughometer‐III are:

Accurate and repeatable outputs regardless of vehicle type, suspension and passenger loads

Axle‐mounted inertial sensor used to determine road profile and roughness

Integrated GPS for location data with on‐screen display of satellite tracking status

Outputs in International Roughness Index (IRI)

Can be installed in most passenger and light commercial vehicles

Fast and simple download of data, to laptop or computer, using USB connection

6.2. Pavement Condition Survey

Various typical pavement distresses were observed by visual inspection in the considered roads. The

different distresses considered for bituminous and concrete pavements are described below:

13

Distresses in Bituminous Pavement

Cracking, raveling, pot holes and patching are visually observed and recorded as percentage of the

area are reported

Rutting: Rutting is a surface depression in a wheel path and is a load‐associated distress.

Potholes: These are small, bowl‐shaped depressions in the pavement surface that penetrate all the

way through the bituminous layer down to the base course.

Fig.7. Photograph Showing the Distresses in a Bituminous Pavement

Patching: Patches are repairs made to previous distress, indicating prior maintenance activity.

Improper patching can introduce a degree of roughness, further deterioration at the edges of the

patch, or even failure of the patch itself can happen if the underlying problem was not addressed

during patching.

Block Cracking: Block cracking is a climate/materials related distress, where shrinkage of the

bituminous surface or underlying stabilized base causes interconnected cracks that divide the surface

into irregular pieces.

Alligator Cracking: This distress is also known as fatigue cracking and is a traffic loading related

distress that is initiated in the wheel paths.

14

Longitudinal Cracking: These cracks or discontinuities may appear anywhere along a shoulder or

driving lane and run roughly parallel to the pavement centerline

Raveling: Raveling is the progressive loss of surface aggregates caused by weathering, traffic, or a

combination of the two.

Distresses in Concrete Pavement

Following are the common distresses in a concrete pavement.

Spalling: This can be described by cracking, breaking or chipping of joint/crack edges. Usually occurs

within about 0.6 m of joint/crack edge. Due to spalling, the problems generated on the road are

loose debris on the pavement, roughness, etc. This is generally an indicator of advanced joint/crack

deterioration.

Faulting: A difference in elevation across a joint or crack usually associated with un‐doweled JPCP is

known as faulting. Faulting is noticeable when the average faulting in the pavement section reaches

about 2.5 mm.

Polished Aggregate: These are areas of pavement where the portion of aggregate extending above

the cement paste is either very small or there are no rough or angular aggregate particles. This

results in decreased skid resistance.

Shrinkage Cracking: This may be described by hairline cracks formed during PCC setting and curing

that is not located at joints. Usually, they do not extend through the entire depth of the slab.

Shrinkage cracks are considered as distress if they occur in an uncontrolled manner

Linear Cracking: These are linear cracks not associated with corner breaks or blowups that extend

across the entire slab. Typically, these cracks divide an individual slab into two to four pieces. This is

often referred to as “panel cracking”. This creates roughness, allows moisture infiltration leading to

erosion of base/subbase support, and also these cracks will eventually spall and disintegrate if not

sealed.

15

Fig.8. Photograph Showing a Distressed Concrete Pavement

Corner Break: This is a crack that intersects the PCC slab joints near the corner. A corner break

extends through the entire slab and is caused by high corner stresses. Problems associated with the

corner break are roughness, moisture infiltration, severe corner breaks will fault, spall and

disintegrate.

Popouts: Small pieces of PCC that break loose from the surface leaving small divots or pock marks.

Popouts range from 25 – 100 mm in diameter and from 25 – 50 mm deep. Problem associated with

popouts is roughness which is usually an indicator of poor material.

6.3. Non‐Destructive Structural Evaluation of Pavements

Rebound hammer test:

Rebound hammer test is used to provide a convenient and rapid indication of the compressive

strength of concrete. It consists of a spring controlled mass that slides on a plunger within a tubular

housing. This equipment has been used to assess the strength of the concrete pavements. The

rebound hammer and its operation are shown in the figures 9 and 10.

16

Fig.9. Photograph Showing a Rebound Hammer

Fig.10. Working Principle of Rebound Hammer

When the plunger of rebound hammer is pressed against the surface of concrete, a spring controlled

mass with a constant energy is made to hit concrete surface to rebound back. The extent of rebound,

which is a measure of surface hardness, is measured on a graduated scale. This measured value is

designated as Rebound Number (rebound index). A concrete with low strength and low stiffness will

absorb more energy to yield in a lower rebound value.

In‐situ Evaluation of Pavement Layers using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP)

DCP is an effective device for in‐situ evaluation of subgrade and granular layers due to its relatively

small and lightweight design and easy operation. DCP equipment has two main components, i.e. the

lower shaft and the upper shaft. The lower shaft is of 16 mm diameter and 800 mm long and can be

extended to 1200 mm using an extension rod. This carries an anvil on top and a 60° hardened alloy

cone of 20 mm base diameter at its bottom. The upper shaft carries a sliding hollow cylindrical

hammer of 8 kg weight, which strikes the anvil with a fixed fall of 575 mm. Because of its simple and

17

economical design, DCP is being used in the field to characterize the subgrade and base materials.

One of the greatest advantages of the DCP device lies in its ability to provide a continuous record of

relative soil strength with depth. By plotting a graph of penetration index versus depth, one can

observe the profile showing layer depths and strength conditions. Fig.11 shows a DCP test in

progress.

Fig.11. Investigation of pavement layers at a site using DCP

6.4. Extraction of Cores from Concrete Pavement

The examination and compression testing of cores, extracted from hardened concrete is a well‐

established method, which enables visual inspection of the interior region of a structure. This will

provide an idea about the thickness of the concrete layers. It can be coupled with strength

estimation and physical properties such as density, water absorption, etc. The cores can be used as

samples for analysis subsequent to strength testing. For extracting the core from the concrete

pavements, a core cutter is needed which should be firmly supported and braced against concrete to

prevent relative movement which will result in a distorted or broken core. The photograph given

below shows a core cutter used for taking out a core form the concrete pavement.

18

Fig.12. Taking Cores from a Concrete Pavement

6.5. Test Pit in Bituminous Pavements for Material Evaluation

Test pits (Figure 13) are excavated in the bituminous pavements close to the edge of the carriageway

to collect pavement layer composition data. Thicknesses of different layers are observed from the

test pits and recorded for analysis. Materials from different pavement layers including sub grade are

collected from the pit for laboratory evaluation. Different tests are conducted in the laboratory on

the materials collected from site.

Fig.13. Trial Pit in Bituminous Pavements

19

7. FIELD INVESTIGATIONS

This section presents the results obtained from various field and laboratory investigations carried out

during this study.

7.1. Pavement Composition

7.1.1. Composition of CC Road Pavements

A typical CC road pavement consists of 75‐100 mm layer of PCC (1:2:4) over a lean PCC (1:3:6) layer

laid over 50‐100 mm sand. Concrete cores have been taken from the CC road pavements to find out

the composition of the layers. Table‐2 presents the thicknesses of different layers observed during

the field investigations.

Table‐2: Pavement Composition of CC Roads

Sec.

No.

Road Section Block Thickness (mm)

CC

(1:2:4)

CC

(1:3:6)

Sand

1 Khuntakata Internal Village Road Athagarh 70‐75 75‐100 50‐100

2 Kuhunda Internal Village Road Mahanga 85‐95 70‐100 50‐75

3 Nuasatanga Village CC road Niali 70‐75 75‐95 50‐75

4 MDR‐77 (Kalika Prasad) to Muraripur BankiDampada 65‐78 75‐90 50‐75

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village (CC portion) Anandpur 88‐97 90‐100 50‐100

6 Bhalukipatala Internal Village Road Ghatagaon 65‐77 70‐90 50‐75

7 Durgapur to BhalukaNala Jhumpura 55‐65 70‐95 50‐75

8 DehuriSahi to JuangaSahi (CC portion) Harichandanpur 60‐84 75‐95 50‐75

9 NH to Kasurpada Village Road Kesinga 55‐65 75‐95 50‐75

10 Peramanji to AdibasiPada Th. Rampur 55‐60 65‐85 50‐75

11 Faranga Internal Village Road Golamunda 68‐82 70‐95 50‐75

12 NH26 to Gountiapada Kokasara 65‐75 75‐90 50‐75

7.1.2. Composition of Bituminous Road Pavements

A typical rural road bituminous pavement consisted of 150‐200 mm of granular subbase (moorum),

150 mm of Base (WBM) and 20‐25 mm of premix carpet. The pavement layer composition obtained

through trial pits made in the bituminous test sections are given below in table‐3.

20

Table‐3: Pavement Composition of Bituminous Roads

Thickness (mm)

Sl

No.

Road Section Block Sub‐base Base Surfacing

1 PWD Road to Badabhuin Athagarh 180 170 25

2 PWD Road to Basudevbpur Mahanga 100 130 20

3 Krushnaprasad to Tampada Niali 250 170 25

4 RD Road to Brahmania BankiDampada 150 180 25

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village Anandpur 40 75 30

6 Bholabeda to Balukipatala Ghatagaon 150 150 25

7 Arsala to Chauthia Jhumpura 270 90 40

8 DehuriSahi to JuangaSahi Harichandanpur 130 150 20

9 Kokomunda to Gokuleswar Kesinga 175 160 25

10 RD Road to Sirimaska Th. Rampur 125 150 20

11 Faranga to Kumbhari Golamunda 100 75 25

12 NH26 to Kundaguda Kokasara 75 150 25

7.2. Pavement Condition

7.2.1. Condition of CC Roads

Cement Concrete roads taken up under this study were mostly 2‐5 years old. The overall condition of

these roads were found to be fair to poor. The following paragraphs present some of the problems

associated with CC roads.

Fig. 14. High Edge Drop in CC Roads

21

There is no provision of shoulders in the CC road sections. Therefore the edge drop was found to be

very high at places. The photogragh shown in Fig.14 presents a simlilar section, where the difference

in levels of the road surface and the adjacent land is about 150 mm. This creates safety concern for

the vehicles plying on ths road during crossing and overtaking maneuvres. Also, the edges are prone

to damage in such conditions. The following photograph shows damage of edges and corners of the

slabs due to movement of wheels along the edges.

Fig. 15. Edge and Corner failure in CC Road Pavements

Cracking in the concrete pavements were also observed in many cases. The cracking seen in some

sections are longitudinal cracks, which mostly happens due to differential settlement of the subgrade

soil. The photograpghs presented below shows these cracks in some CC road sections.

Fig.16. Cracks in CC Road Pavements

Drainage has been found to be one of the major problem in the habitation areas. Damages are found

to be more in roads with poor drainage condition.

22

Fig.17. Poor Drainge in Village Areas

In few road sections, it was found that, the aggregates in the cement concrete layers are exposed

due to erosion of cement mortar. This happens motly due to low cement content in the concrete.

The photograph shown in Fig.18 presents exposed aggregates in a concrete road surface.

Fig.18. CC Road Surface in Poor Condition

23

7.2.2. Condition of Bituminous Roads

Bituminous roads taken up under this study were mostly 3‐5 years old. Some roads were observed

with distresses like rutting, raveling and potholes apart from local settlements. Fig. 19 shows two

moderately distressed road section and Fig. 20 shows heavily distressed road sections.

Fig.19. Low to Moderate Distresses in Bituminous Roads

Fig.20. Heavliy Distressed Bituminous Road Surface

Table‐4 and Table‐5 present the pavement condition data of CC Roads and Bituminous roads

respectively.

24

Table‐4: Pavement Condition Data‐ CC Road Sections

Sec No.

Road Section Block Road Width (m)

Shoulder Edge Drop (mm)

Cracking Drainage Joint Condition

Surface Finish

Riding Comfort

1 Khuntakata Internal Village Road

Athagarh 3.6 No 0‐150 Mild cracking in one phase of construction

Poor Fair Fair to Poor

Fair to Poor

2 Kuhunda Internal Village Road

Mahanga 3.0‐3.5 No 0‐100 Low‐Mild cracks in older constructions


Fair to Poor

3 Nuasatanga Village CC road

Niali 3.0‐3.5 No 0‐100 Mild‐severe cracks in older constructions

Poor Poor Fair to Poor

Fair to Poor

4 MDR‐77 (Kalika Prasad) to Muraripur

Banki Dampada 3.65 No 0‐150 Mild‐severe cracks in older constructions

Poor Poor poor Fair to Poor

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village (CC portion)

Anandpur 3.8 No 0‐100 Mild‐severe cracks in older constructions


Fair to Poor

6 Bhalukipatala Internal Village Road

Ghatagaon 3.5 No 0‐150 Mild‐severe cracks in older constructions

Poor Poor poor Poor

7 Durgapur to BhalukaNala

Jhumpura 3.5 No 0‐150 Low Poor Poor Fair to Poor

Fair to Poor

8 DehuriSahi to JuangaSahi (CC portion)

Harichandanpur 3.5 No 0‐100 Low Poor Poor poor Fair to Poor

9 NH to Kasurpada Village Road

Kesinga 3.0‐4.0 No 0‐50 Low‐Mild cracks in older constructions


Fair to Poor

10 Peramanji to AdibasiPada

Th. Rampur 3.0‐3.5 No 0‐100 Mild‐severe cracks in older constructions

Poor Poor poor Poor

11 Faranga Internal Village Road

Golamunda 3.0‐3.5 No 0‐150 Mild‐severe cracks in older constructions

Very Poor

Poor Poor Fair to Poor

12 NH26 to Gountiapada Kokasara 3.5 No 0‐75 Low Fair Poor Fair to Poor

Fair to Good

25

Table‐5: Pavement Condition Data‐ Bituminous Road Sections

Sec No.

Road Section Block Road Width (m)

Shoulder Rutting Ravelling Cracking Potholes Drainage Riding Comfort

1 PWD Road to Badabhuin

Athagarh 3.8 Yes Low Low Low Low Good Fair

2 PWD Road to Basudevbpur

Mahanga 3.75 Yes Moderate Low Low Low Fair Fair

3 Krushnaprasad to Tampada

Niali 3.75 Yes Severe Moderate Moderate Moderate Fair Poor

4 RD Road to Brahmania

BankiDampada 3.75 Yes Low No No No Good Fair to Good

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village

Anandpur 3.8 Yes Low No No No Good Fair

6 Bholabeda to Bhalukipatala

Ghatagaon 3.75 Yes Low Low Low Low Good Fair

7 Arsala to Chauthia Jhumpura 3.75 Yes Low Moderate Low Low Good Fair

8 DehuriSahi to JuangaSahi

Harichandanpur 3.75 Yes Low Low No No Good Fair

9 Kokomunda to Gokuleswar

Kesinga 3.75 Yes Low Low Low Low Good Fair to Poor

10 RD Road to Sirimaska

Th. Rampur 3.0 Yes Low No Low No Fair Fair

11 Faranga to Kumbhari

Golamunda 3.75 Yes Low No Low No Good Fair

12 NH26 to Kundaguda Kokasara 3.0 Yes Low Low Moderate Low Good Fair

26

7.3. Roughness of Road Surfaces

Roughness of the road surfaces were measured using ARRB make Roughometer attached to the axle

of a vehicle. The observed roughness values are presented below in tables ‐ 6 and 7

Table‐6: Roughness of CC Road Surfaces

Sec. No. Road Section Roughness (IRI)

1 Khuntakata Internal Village Road 9.05

2 Kuhunda Internal Village Road 6.1

3 Nuasatanga Village CC road 11.8

4 MDR‐77 (Kalika Prasad) to Muraripur 11.5

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village (CC portion) 9.4

6 Bhalukipatala Internal Village Road 11.8

7 Durgapur to BhalukaNala 9.25

8 DehuriSahi to JuangaSahi (CC portion) 5.45

9 NH to Kasurpada Village Road 8.9

10 Peramanji to AdibasiPada 11.5

11 Faranga Internal Village Road 8.7

12 NH26 to Gountiapada 10.45

Table‐7: Roughness of Bituminous Road Surfaces

Sec. No. Road Section Roughness (IRI)

1 PWD Road to Badabhuin 6.85

2 PWD Road to Basudevbpur 9.1

3 Krushnaprasad to Tampada 12.4

4 RD Road to Brahmania 10

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village 6.7

6 Bholabeda to Balukipatala 9.85

7 Arsala to Chauthia 8.1

8 Dehuri Sahi to Juanga Sahi 10.4

9 Kokomunda to Gokuleswar 11.2

10 RD Road to Sirimaska 8.6

11 Faranga to Kumbhari 8.9

12 NH26 to Kundaguda 10.85

27

7.4. Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test

In‐situ strength of subgrade soils were measured using a DCP. The field CBR values estimated from

the DCP penetration are presented below in tables ‐ 8 and 9.

Table‐8: Field CBR from DCP Tests for CC Roads

Sl No. Road Section Block Field CBR (%)

1 Khuntakata Internal Village Road Athagarh 23.84

2 Kuhunda Internal Village Road Mahanga 5.43

3 Nuasatanga Village CC road Niali 4.66

4 MDR‐77 (Kalika Prasad) to Muraripur Banki Dampada 11.9

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village (CC portion) Anandpur 13.86

6 Bhalukipatala Internal Village Road Ghatagaon 4.73

7 Durgapur to Bhaluka Nala Jhumpura 11.02

8 Dehuri Sahi to Juanga Sahi (CC portion) Harichandanpur 3.77

9 NH to Kasurpada Village Road Kesinga 15.69

10 Peramanji to Adibasi Pada Th. Rampur 24.56

11 Faranga Internal Village Road Golamunda 17.11

12 NH26 to Gountiapada Kokasara 12.1

Table‐9: Field CBR from DCP Tests for BItuminous Roads

Sl No. Road Section Block Field CBR (%)

1 PWD Road to Badabhuin Athagarh 13.47

2 PWD Road to Basudevbpur Mahanga 8.44

3 Krushnaprasad to Tampada Niali 12.38

4 RD Road to Brahmania Banki Dampada 20.3

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village Anandpur 57.28

6 Bholabeda to Balukipatala Ghatagaon 13.45

7 Arsala to Chauthia Jhumpura 21.06

8 Dehuri Sahi to Juanga Sahi Harichandanpur 3.55

9 Kokomunda to Gokuleswar Kesinga 18.52

10 Srimaska to Sindhipadar Th. Rampur 15.53

11 Faranga to Kumbhari Golamunda 9.54

12 NH26 to Kundaguda Kokasara 31.69

28

7.5. Rebound Hammer Test results

Surface modulus of the concrete pavements were determined using the rebound hammer

mechanism. Tests were conducted at regular intervals with three blows at each location for the

entire test section. Table‐10 presents the average strength of the concrete core obtained for the test

sections under this study.

Table‐10: Strength of Concrete Roads usong Rebound Hammer

Sec.

No.

Name of Road Section Block Strength of Concrete

(MPa)

1 Khuntakata Internal Village Road Athagarh 27.24

2 Kuhunda Internal Village Road Mahanga 27.32

3 Nuasatanga Village CC road Niali 21.80

4 MDR‐77 (Kalika Prasad) to Muraripur BankiDampada 16.40

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village (CC portion) Anandpur 25.93

6 Bhalukipatala Internal Village Road Ghatagaon 17.19

7 Durgapur to BhalukaNala Jhumpura 10.90

8 DehuriSahi to JuangaSahi (CC portion) Harichandanpur 11.88

9 NH to Kasurpada Village Road Kesinga 37.65

10 Peramanji to AdibasiPada Th. Rampur 7.81

11 Faranga Internal Village Road Golamunda 11.89

12 NH26 to Gountiapada Kokasara 8.42

8. LABORATORY IVESTIGATIONS

8.1. Soil Strength Characterization

Soil samples were collected from each test section and tested in the laboratory to determine the

Proctor compaction parameters as well as the CBR value of the soils. Table‐11 and Table‐12 present

the results obtained from the laboratory tests carried out on the soil samples collected from CC roads

and Bituminous roads respectively.

29

Table‐11: Results of the Tests Conducted on Soil Samples Collected from CC Roads

Sec No

Name of the Road Block Standard Proctor Compaction Test

Soaked CBR (%)

OMC (%) MDD (gm/cc)

1 Khuntakata Internal Village Road Athagarh 8.70 2.21 14.16

2 Kuhunda Internal Village Road Mahanga 11.40 1.89 5.60

3 Nuasatanga Village CC road Niali 10.50 1.92 6.70


Banki 14.20 1.97 4.00


Anandpur 12.40 1.96 6.90


Ghatagaon 11.15 2.07 7.52

7 Durgapur to BhalukaNala Jhumpura 15.04 1.75 2.93


Harichandanpur

9.80 1.96 9.98

9 NH to Kasurpada Village Road Kesinga 11.10 2.00 19.88

10 Peramanji to AdibasiPada Th. Rampur 14.50 1.81 4.39

11 Faranga Internal Village Road Golamunda 13.20 1.87 4.16

12 NH26 to Gountiapada Kokasara 10.80 2.00 6.41

Table‐12: Results of the Tests Conducted on Soil Samples Collected from Bituminous Roads

Sec. No

Name of the Road Section Block Standard Proctors Compaction Test

CBR Soaked (%) OMC (%) MDD (gm/cc)

1 PWD Road to Badabhuin Athagarh 10.60 2.12 12.31

2 PWD Road to Basudevbpur Mahanga 17.45 1.63 1.45

3 Krushnaprasad to Tampada Niali 14.50 1.97 4.08

4 RD Road to Brahmania Banki 13.50 2.02 17.34

5 NH215 to Kolimati Village Anandpur 9.20 2.05 26.86

6 Bholabeda to Balukipatala Ghatagaon 13.80 2.02 5.70

7 Arsala to Chauthia Jhumpura 11.20 2.00 4.50

8 DehuriSahi to JuangaSahi Harichandanpur 16.30 1.67 1.52

9 Kokomunda to Gokuleswar Kesinga 11.70 2.02 6.01

10 RD Road to Sirimaska Th.Rampur 12.10 1.97 18.21

11 Faranga to Kumbhari Golamunda 13.50 1.85 2.55

12 NH26 to Kundaguda Kokasara 15.50 1.88 3.70

30

8.2. In‐direct Tensile Strength (IDT) Test results

The cores taken from the CC road pavements were tested for its failure strength in terms of Tensile

Strength using Split Tensile Strength test (Indirect Tensile Strength Test). Compressive strength of the

cores were obtained using the correlation between IDT and UCS. The cube strengths were later

predicted using the correlation between the cylinder strength and cube strength of cement concrete

samples. The ratio of standard cylinder to cube strength has been taken as 0.8. The table – 13 as

given below presents the IDT, UCS and the predicted cube strength values for all the samples

collected for the CC road sections.

Table‐13: Strength of Concrete Cores Taken from CC Roads

Sec. No.

Road Section Block IDT (MPa) UCS (MPa) Cube Strength (MPa)

1 Khuntakata Internal Village Road

Athagarh 1.5‐3.4 15‐34 18.8‐42.5

2 Kuhunda Internal Village Road Mahanga 1.4‐3.2 14‐32 17.5‐40.0

3 Nuasatanga Village CC road Niali 1.9‐2.9 19‐29 23.8‐36.2


BankiDampada 1.45‐2.52 14.5‐25 18.1‐31.5


Anandpur 2.68‐3.23 27‐32 33.5‐40.4


Ghatagaon 1.00‐2.38 10‐24 12.5‐29.8

7 Durgapur to BhalukaNala Jhumpura 1.95‐2.66 19‐27 24.4‐33.3


Harichandanpur 1.69‐2.01 17‐20 21.1‐25.1

9 NH to Kasurpada Village Road Kesinga 2.43‐2.94 24‐29 30.4‐36.8

10 Peramanji to AdibasiPada Th. Rampur 0.84‐1.86 8.4‐18.6 10.5‐23.3

11 Faranga Internal Village Road Golamunda 0.78‐0.88 7.8‐8.8 9.8‐11.0

12 NH26 to Gountiapada Kokasara 0.65‐0.67 6.5‐6.7 8.2‐8.4

9. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

9.1. Strength of Concrete Pavements

This is to mention that the strength of top concrete layer in CC road pavement is made of 1:2:4

cement concrete, that corresponds to a characteristic compressive strength of 20 MPa. From Fig.21,

it may be observed that more than half of the CC road sections are not meeting the desired strength

of 20 MPa. This indicates that adequate quality control in material selection and during construction

has not been done by the executing agency.

31

Fig.21. Results of rebound hammer test conducted on CC Road Pavements

The average indirect tensile strength of the concrete, assessed through the cores taken from CC road

pavements are presented in Fig.22. The tensile strengths of the concrete samples were found to be

less compared to the requirement to meet the stresses generated under standard axle load.

Fig.22. Results of IDT tests conducted on the Cocrete Cores

Fig.23 shows the predicted cube strength of the concrete estimated from the strength of the cores

taken from the CC road pavements.

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12

Strength (MPa)

Section No.

Rebound Hammer Test

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

IDT (M

Pa)

Section No.

Indirect Tensile Strength on Cores

32

Fig.23. Predicted Cube Strength of Concretes

It may be observed from the graph that, except three sections (i.e. Sections 11 and 12), the average

cube stength of all the concrete samples are more than 15 MPa. This is to mention that, though

these values differ from rebound hammer test results, the results obtained from testing of cores are

considered to be more accurate than the rebound hammer, as it gives the surface hardness of the

concrete.

9.2. Roughness of Pavement Surfaces

Roughness (in terms of IRI) of the CC road sections are presented in Fig.24. The roughness values

were found to be high for most of the sections due to presence of badly constructed and maintained

joints and uneven pavement surfaces indicating bad workmanship.

Roughness of the bituminous road surfaces may be attributed to local depressions, rutting, raveling

and potholes. The roughness values observed for the bituminous road surfaces are presented in Fig.

25.

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Strength (MPa)

Section No.

Predicted Cube Strength

33

Fig.24. Roughness of CC Road Sections

Fig. 25. Roughness of Bituminous Road Sections

9.3. Life of CC Road Pavements

As observed from the structural condition of the various CC Roads constructed in different phases

and under different schemes and taking into account the quality control measures during the

construction process, it may be stated that the life of such pavements would not be more than 10

years. As mentioned, in rural roads manual, the life of bituminous roads constructed as per PMGSY

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Rough

ness (IRI)

Section No.

Roughness of CC Road Surfaces

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Rough

ness (IRI)

Section No.

Roughness of BT Road Surfaces

34

guidelines is also 10 years, in which one carpeting layer is to be done after 5 years along with regular

annual maintenance.

9.4. Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Flexible Pavements have been the preferred choice because of low initial cost as compared to the

Rigid Pavements. The superiority of rigid pavements over flexible pavements is well recognized world

over. Initial cost of the concrete pavement on rural link roads is more by about 25% over the flexible

pavement, but in lifecycle costing, concrete pavement has proved to be economical over flexible

pavement.

9.4.1. Initial Cost

This is the cost of construction of the pavement, which mainly depends upon the pavement

thickness, governed by the strength of subgrade soiI and traffic loading, cost of materials and cost of

execution of the work.

9.4.2. Maintenance Cost

The maintenance cost includes the maintenance of pavement during the design life of pavement to

keep the pavement at the specified service level.

9.4.3. Life Cycle Cost Analysis

The choice of the appropriate economically advantageous pavement type, flexible or rigid, is made

by carrying out Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis which takes into account the initial investment cost and

also the maintenance/rehabilitation cost over the design life of the pavement structure. Life cycle

cost analysis can be defined as a procedure by which a pavement design alternative is selected, that

provides a satisfactory level of service at the lowest cost over design life. The selection criteria of

type of pavement, flexible or rigid, should be based not on the initial cost of construction, but

lifecycle cost, which includes the discounted maintenance and pavement strengthening costs that

are incurred during the design Iife of the pavement. The economic analysis methods used most

commonly for this purpose include present worth, annualized cost, and rate of return. The analysis is

most sensitive to the factors of inflation, discount rate, and analysis period.

9.4.4. Flexible Pavement Design and Cost of Construction per km

The design of flexible pavements depends upon the CBR value of sub grade and number of

commercial vehicles per day that will use the road during its design life, which is 10 years for Rural

35

Roads. A typical pavement composition based on SP:72‐2015 and its cost for rural roads with CBR

value of 3 to 4 and traffic T3 category is given below:

GSB = 175 mm

WBM = 150 mm

Premixed Carpet = 20 mm

The cost of the above 3.0 m wide pavement will thus be about Rs.23.03 lakhs per km.

Table‐14 : Rate of Materials in Bitumnous Road Pavement Construction used for Analysis

Sl No. Item Dimension Unit Rate (Rs.)

1 Granular Subabse 175 mm Thick Cum 1000

2 Water Baound Macadam 150 mm Thick Cum 2500

3 Premixed Carpet with other layers such

as Prime coat, Tack coat and seal coat

20 mm Thick Sqm 200

9.4.5. Maintenance Cost of Flexible Pavement

• It has been assumed that one layer of WBM (75 mm) will be laid every 10th Year after

construction.

• Surface renewals (20 mm Premix Carpet) are to be provided once in every 5 years.

• The cost of ordinary repairs for rural roads with bituminous pavement has been taken as

Rs. 20, 000 per year (average) for analysis.

9.4.6. Cost of Construction of CC Road per km.

The section considered for analysis has been taken as given by Panchayati Raj Department for non‐

expansive soil area. This consists of the following configuration:

Sand : 100 mm

PCC 1:3:6 (M10) : 100 mm

PCC 1:2:4 (M15) : 100 mm

Table‐15: Rate of Materials used in CC Road Pavement Construction

Sl No. Item Dimension Unit Rate (Rs.)

1 PCC 1:2:4 100 mm Thick Cum 4800

2 PCC 1:3:6 100 mm Thick Cum 3800

3 Sand 100 mm Thick Cum 400

4 Cut off (both side) 300 mm x 225 mm Cum 3800

36

As per PRI department estimate, The cost of above pavement composition will be about Rs. 32.3 lakh

per km.

9.4.7. Maintenance Cost of Rigid Pavement

The average yearly maintenance cost of rigid pavement willbe about Rs. 10,000/‐ per km for a single

lane rural road tocover filling of sealing compound in the joints, repairs ofconcrete spalling etc.

Rehabilitation/ strengthening of the CC Road pavement has been proposed after 10 years with 75

mm of cement concrete (1:2:4). For a 3.0 m wide road this cost will be Rs. 3.60 lakhs per km using the

rate of concrete adopted for life cycle cost analysis.

9.4.8. Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Period of analysis has been considered as 20 years, being the design life of concrete pavement in

rural area. The discountrate of 10% has been taken. Inflation rate of 5% has been considered for

future rise in prices of materials.

Cost Estimate:

1. Initial Cost of Flexible Pavement = Rs. 23.05 lakh per km

2. Initial Cost of Rigid Pavement = Rs. 32.30 lakh per km

3. Annual Maintenance of flexible pavement= Rs. 0.20 lakh per km.

4. Renewal of wearing course of flexible pavement is considered in every 5 years. In 5th and 15th

year after completion, renewal cost = 200 x 3.00 x 1000= Rs. 6.00 lakhs

5. Strengthening with WBM and pre‐mix carpet every 10th year:

WBM 75 mm = 0.075 x 3.00 x 1000 x 2500 = Rs. 5.625 lakhs

PC 20mm = 200 x 3.00 x 1000= Rs. 6.00 lakhs

Total Cost= Rs. 11.625 lakhs

6. Average maintenance cost of CC road pavement is Rs.0.10 lakh per year

7. Rehabilitation/ strengthening of the concrete pavement after 10 years with 75 mm of

cement concrete 1:2:4 = Rs. 10.80 lakhs per km.

DATA ASSUMPTION:

Analysis Period : 20 Years

Discount Rate : 10%

Inflation Rate : 5% Per Year

37

Cost (Rs. In Lakhs) Per Km.

Bituminous Pavement CC Road Pavement

Construction Cost 23.03 33.20

Routine Maintenance/Year 0.20 (avg) 0.1 (avg)

Renewal (5 Years) 6.00 ‐

Strengthening (10 Years) 11.625 10.80

Table‐16: Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Bituminous and Concrete Pavement

Year Bituminous Road Pavement CC Road Pavement

Const. Cost Maint. Cost NPV Const. Cost Maint. Cost NPV

0 23.03 ‐ 23.03 32.30 ‐ 32.30

1 0.2 0.18 0.11 0.00

2 0.22 0.18 0.11 0.09

3 0.23 0.17 0.12 0.09

4 0.24 0.17 0.12 0.08

5 7.66 4.75 0.13 0.08

6 0.27 0.15 0.13 0.08

7 0.28 0.14 0.14 0.07

8 0.30 0.14 0.15 0.07

9 0.31 0.13 0.16 0.07

10 18.94 7.30 17.59 6.78

11 0.34 0.12 0.17 0.06

12 0.36 0.11 0.18 0.06

13 0.38 0.11 0.19 0.05

14 0.40 0.10 0.20 0.05

15 12.47 2.99 0.21 0.05

16 0.44 0.10 0.22 0.05

17 0.46 0.09 0.23 0.05

18 0.48 0.09 0.24 0.04

19 0.51 0.08 0.25 0.04

20 0.53 0.08 0.27 0.04

Total NPV Cost 40.22 40.29

*All amounts are mentioned in Rupees (in lakhs)

Life Cycle cost of flexible pavements and rigid pavements wiII be almost same for a service life of 20

years.

38

9.4.9. Economic Analysis

The details of economic analysis based on net present worth method, i.e., net present value of total

construction cost and maintenance cost over the analysis period of 20 years are provided in Table‐17

for flexible and rigid pavement. The summary of Initial and Life Cycle Costs are given below:

Table‐17: Summary of Initial and life Cycle Cost

Sl No. Pavement Type Initial Cost (Rs. In

Lakhs)

Life Cycle Cost (for 20 yrs period)

(Rs. In Lakhs)

1 Flexible/bituminous 23.03 40.22

2 Rigid/concrete 32.30 40.29

• The Iife cycle cost of a concrete pavement (as per present practice) for construction/maintenance

costs is approximately same to bituminous pavements considering an anlysis period of 20 years.

• From the above, it can be concluded that although the initial cost of concrete pavement is higher,

the life cycle cost is at par with bituminous pavement considering a 20 years of period of service life.

• Besides, life cycle cost consideration, several sites demands for concrete pavement from

climatic/environmental considerations such as locations in heavy rainfall/waterlogged areas, road

stretch passing through village portion or sub‐grade soil having low CBR values. Some of these

advantages are mentioned in para 9.5.

9.5. Suitability of Pavement Surface (Concrete vs Bituminous)

The following points favour the selection of concrete roads for rural areas:

Concrete roads are more durable than bituminous roads.

Frequent repairs are not needed for concrete roads when compared to bituminous roads.

Concrete roads are less affected by the drainage condition of the road

No ruts form in concrete pavements and also no potholes, therefore smoother ride in wet

weather conditions.

Concrete pavements are common choice for regions subjected to an aggressive natural

environment and also for steep slopes.

Extreme weather conditions are liable to cause more damage to asphalt roads than concrete

roads.

When looking at the environmental aspects, concrete is the better option as bitumen produce

polluting gases when heated at very high temperature.

39

The following points favour the selection of bitumen surfaced roads:

When comparing the cost, concrete roads come with a higher initial paving cost than bituminous

roads.

Maintenance is easier with asphalt roads. Maintenance of a part of the bituminous road is

possible. Moreover, these roads can be re‐layered, which is not very convenient with concrete

roads.

Bituminous roads provide a smooth riding surface compared to concrete roads due to absence

of joints.

When compared to concrete roads, bituminous roads have better skid resistance and provide

good traction providing better safety condition.

10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

10.1. Conclusions

The following conclusion may be drawn from the present study:

The quality of construction of the concrete pavements were found to be poor at some locations.

There is no provision for shoulder construction under this scheme. Good shoulders will reduce

edge damage significantly and also will improve the safety condition of the road.

Finishing of the CC road surfaces with proper camber was not observed, which may be due to

lack of expertise among the persons taking up such works.

Out of the twelve CC road sections considered in this study, compressive strength of the top

concrete layers for nine sections met the desired strength corresponding to the specified mix.

Roughness of the CC were found to be high due to unevenness of the pavement surfaces and

badly constructed and maintained joints.

Bituminous pavements are providing smooth riding surface than the concrete pavements.

Higher roughness for some bituminous roads were observed due to local settlements, rutting,

raveling and potholes of different severity level.

Drainage condition of the roads was found to be affecting road performance significantly.

Subgrade strength as well as the quality of materials used in pavement construction were found

to affect the pavement performance to a large extent.

As per the present practice of CC road construction, the life of pavements can be expected to be

10 years, if properly constructed.

From the life cycle cost analysis, it was observed that, life cycle cost of rigid pavement

constructed under the CC road schemes compares well with typical flexible pavement structures

adopted for rural roads considering a 20 years of service life.

40

10.2. Recommendations:

The standard of concrete pavement construction needs to be improved in the following manner:

As these roads are usually constructed in thickly habitated village portions which are prone

to drainage problems, concrete pavements are more suited to these conditions.

Width of roads needs to be at least one lane, i.e. 3.75 m.

Adhoc design approaches need to avoided and IRC guidelines should be followed for

rational pavement design.

Proper drainage measures (i.e. side drains and cross drains) should be provided to ensure

better performance of the roads.

Shoulders should be provided to reduce edge failures and improve safety of the roads

avoiding sudden edge drops.

Grades of the concrete should be mentioned in the guidelines instead of the corresponding

mix proportion as per nominal mix. Quality or grade of concrete surface (top concrete

layer) may be adopted as per the rural roads manual (i.e. M30), to address the tensile

stresses in the concrete under standard axle loading. However, considering the present

performance of the 1:2:4 concrete, this may still continue to be adopted for light traffic

conditions with proper quality conctrol mechanism.

Interdepartmental co‐ordination should be ensured for utilisation of field laboratories of RD

and PWD departments considering the fact that, PRI department does have its own

laboratory facility at block levels.

As per the mandate of this programe, construction of such roads are usually taken up by

village level leaders, who generally lacks technical expertise in executing such works.

Therefore, capacity building of the supervisors and masons should be taken up at block

level. Cement manufactures like Ultratech, ACC etc. can be roped in for this as most of

them undertake such capacity building programs for masons/technicians. It is also

suggested to develop a construction manual in local language (Odia) with simple drawing

and sketches.

A quality assurance cell may be developed to ensure good quality in construction.

For light traffic conditions, interlocking paver blocks should be used for making concrete

pavements, which has the advantage of high quality products with lesser supervision effort.

Also, new low cost concrete pavement technologies like cell filled concrete pavement

(developed by IIT Kharagpur) and paneled concrete pavements, can be adopted to build

concrete roads at a lower cost.

41

11. PHOTOGRAPGHS

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Anandpur, Keonjhar

42

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Ghatagaon, Keonjhar

43

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Harichandanpur, Keonjhar

44

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Jhumpura, Keonjhar

45

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Athagarh, Cuttack

46

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Banki‐Dampada, Cuttack

47

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Niali, Cuttack

48

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Mahanga, Cuttack

49

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Kesinga, Kalahandi

50

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Golamunda, Kalahandi

51

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Th. Rampur, Kalahandi

52

Photographs taken during Field Investigations at Kokasara, Kalahandi

53

Annexure‐I

Government of Odisha PANCHAYATlRAJ DEPARTMENT

No. 17-STGR-22-2049- LjO 7/; /PR

From

To

Smt. Aparajita Sarangi, lAS Commissioner-cum-Secretary

All Collectors All PO, ORDAs All BOOs

By fax/e-ma il

~OO 9OOI1£),

900110, fl16. ~6'6I1~-'m 00 ~

Odisha Secretarial Sachibalaya Marg, 8hubaneswar-751001

T,I-0674-2536680, 2322875 Fax, 0674-2391413.

£[email protected]

Date: 7-/1; }:;I- ,;tl'/..3

Sub : Comprehensive Guidelines for Cement Concrete Road Scheme.

Madam/Sir,

I am enclosing herewith the Resolution No.3984/PR of 07th

February, 2013 along with enclosures (Plan, Design and Estimate in

Annexure 'A ' & ' B ') for information and necessary follow up action . The

copy of the same may be made available to each GP with technica l

speCification and quality control for their information and perusal.

Your faithfully,

~16pages.

L

- .

Gove rnment of Odisha Panchayati Raj Department

No. 39 2$ It / STGR-22-204 9 dt. 0 70'1 .!3

RESOLUTION

Sub: Comprehensive guidelines for 'Cem ent Concrete Road Scheme'.

The Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Odisha have taken

initiative in the past for construction of Cement Concrete Road in the village

under various schemes in order to improve the quality of life and hygienic

conditions in the v illages. It has become a very popular scheme and one of the

most sought after schemes in the rural areas. In t he past , though cement

concrete roads were taken up under different schemes, all the villages have not

yet been covered. The State Government has decided to give thrust to the

scheme for construction of intra village cem ent concrete roads in the villages

with the objective of attaining saturation in the State w ith special focus on PVTG

(Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups) / ST / SC habitations.

2. Fund Allocation & Implementing Agency-GP is treated as a unit for the purpose of planning. Funds will be allocated

to the Blocks each year depending upon number of GPs.

Block will be the implementing agency fo r the purpose. For Administrative

Approval and Technical Sanction the procedure and delegation of power as

enumerated under the Panchayat Samiti Accounting Procedu re Ru les, 2002 shall

be followed.

3. Flow of Funds: i) Provision of no lakhs per GP is envisaged in the scheme.

ii) Out of no lakhs, ~2 . 00 lakhs shall be given out of 'Devolution of

funds' provided to t he GP under the 3rd State Finance Commission and

balance ~8.00 lakhs shall be provided under the State Plan.

Page·lo(6

.z.:,.'y!,,,-~ ... ~ --7'

/' / ,.

iii) Funds from other sources namely Stote Plan, Centrally Sponsored

Schemes, Centra l Schemes, Externally Aided Projects can be converged

with this scheme.

4. Target: Certain no. of villages will be taken up each year w.e.f. 01.04.13 in a

need based man ner with an aim to cover all villages under the scheme with a

definite time frame with focus on habitation of weaker and most vulnerable

sections of society in convergence with other schemes.

5. Selection of Villages: i) Grama Panchayat will select t he proj ects for each Panchayat keeping in

view the need of the area out of the project list prepared and passed by

Palli Sabha and Grama Sabha during Grama Sabha Shasaktikaran

Karyakram (GSSK). GSSK list will be used for shortlisting projects for a

period of three years w.e.f. 2013 .14 on till it gets exha usted, whichever is

earlier.

ii) The Grama Panchayat is authorized to select the villages / projects to

be taken up in their Grama Panchayat area in the fo llowing manner.

a) The villages / habitations inhabited by Particularly Vulnerable

Tribal Groups (P.V.T.Gs) with no coverage of Cement

Concrete Road should be given first preference.

b) P.V.T.G. vi llages partially covered with Cement Concrete

Roads shall get second priority .

c) After covering habitations falling under category (i) and (ii)

above, vil lages inhabited by Schedu led Tribes in majority with

no coverage of Cement Concrete Road wi ll be considered.

d) ST villages partially covered with Cement Concrete Roads

shall be given next priority.

e) After covering habitations falling under categories mentioned

above, villages of SC Community with no coverage of Cement

Concrete Road shall be considered.

Page-2o(6

1

-7

f) SC vi llages partially covered with Cement Concret e Roads

shall be given next priority .

g) If all t he vi llages / hab itations fall ing under the above

categories have been covered villages / habitations belong ing

to other category shall be considered giving preference to

habitations, with more population having no coverage of

Cement Concrete Road.

h) In other habitations, the Cement Concrete Roads should be

planned for execution f rom the ST / SC Basti towards t he

main habitation and not vice versa.

i) The villages belonging to other category already covered with

500 meters or more of Cement Concrete Roads should not be

ordinarily conside red under this scheme.

6. Preparation of Annual Action Plan: i) Grama Panchayat shall draw up a perspective plan by listing all the

habitations / villages for their Grama Panchayat in t he order of priority

described above out of project list prepared and passed by Palli Sabha

and Grama Sabha during GSSK-2012.

ii) The Annual Action Plan should be drawn up out of t he perspective plan

so prepared keeping in view the availability of resources. Only after

., coverage of all the habit ations / villages mentioned in the category (i)

above, category (ii) cases will be included in the plan . Sa me logic shall

apply for category (iii ) and subsequently category (iv) and other villages.

iii) List of projects f inalized by the Grama Panchayat as envisaged in

Para - 5 shall be scrutinized by BDO and submit ted to the Co llector for his

approval.

iv) Collector shall draw up a holistic plan Grama Panchayat wise taking

into consideration t he likely f low of fund under various schemes and

possibility of convergence.

Poge-30f6

.....l

T .... T~ JT :---, .. .-"

'" r

v} If some port ion of the villages has already been covered with Cement

Concrete Road earlier, the balance port ion can be taken up out of this

scheme.

vi) There should be complete t ransparency in the choice of project and

location. The prioritized list of proj ects and the reasons for taking up

those projects including the crit eria for choice of locations must be

reflected in the Grama Panchayat Pla n and be made available in the

district website as well as website of Panchayati Raj Department . . vii) Every year, the Action Pla n consisti ng of the list of villages to be

taken up, population of t he village with specific reference to PVTG, ST /

SC and the project cost for each project shall be prepared by Grama

Panchayat following the proced ure prescribed above and submitted to

Collector by 31st January to be considered for the next Financial Year.

Collector shall ensure approval of the Action Plan based on the principles

enunciated in Para-S above and communicate the same to the respective

Grama Panchayat latest by 28th / 29th February with a copy to Block

Development Officer.

viii) As soon as the f irst installment of the allocation is received by the

Blocks, they should issue Work Orders to the already identified VLLs as

per the approved action plan for the year.

7. -Execution of Work: i) The works shall be executed by VLL selected by Pa lli Sabha.

ii) Cost of each project shall not be less than ~2 lakhs. In case the project

cost is less than ~2 lakhs. special permission shou ld be obtained from

Collector with proper Justification .

iii) In case a project selected by Grama Panchayat cannot be executed

due to some reason or the other it can be diverted to next prioritized

project in the Grama Panchayat with prior approval of Collector.

iv} Overall responsib ility for implementation of the Scheme shall lie with

Collector and Project Director of DRDAs and they shall be wholly

responsible for effective and timely implementation of the scheme and Paqe-40{6

, n

utilization Df funa. The PD, DRDA snail furn ish Monthl\" Progress Report

(MPR) on Financial and Physical achievements of t he schem e to

Panchayati Raj Department by the 5t h of every month from t he

preceding months.

8 . Quality Control, Inspect ion and Supervision Mechanism: i) The District Administration shall be ensuring construction of good

quali ty of roads. The Assistant Engineer of the Block shall check 100% of all

Cement Concrete Road fo llowed by 10% by Addl. PD (Tech.), 5% by PD, DRDA

and 1 % by Collector and District Mag istrate. The mO'del estimates, design along

with technica l specifications are attached at Annexure 'A' & ' 8 '.

ii) Non-negotia ble items.

a) The width of t he road shall be 3-3.5 meters with expansion joint

on each 5 meters interva l.

b) During casting of concrete like e.e. (1: 3 :6) (metal concrete) &

c.c. (1:2:4) (ch ips concrete) plate v ibrat or shall be used.

Without plate v ibrator no casting of concrete will be made.

c) If the length of the road is more than 100 meter then 8 - 10

tons' roller shall be used for compacting t he sub-base.

d) Efforts should be made for 3% camberi ng of t he road.

e) Minimum seven days curing fo r the concrete road shall be made

and the concerned JE / GPTA has to ensure it .

f) The concerned JE / GPTA shall verify the site personally and

according ly prepare the drawing of the concrete road as per the

approved plan.

g) During casti ng of concrete the concerned JE / GPTA shall be

personally present on the work site and as per his / her direction

mixture of concrete will be prepared.

h) The Assistant Engineer of Block shall visit at least once every

concrete road during casting ofe.e. (1:3 :6) &e.c. (1:2:4) .

Page-S 0{6

/ / .

, I'

9. Social Aud it: Social Audit and Vigilance shall be encouraged at grass roots level.

Collector of the district shall also prepare schedules of inspection which

prescribed the minimum number of field visits for each supervisory level

functionary and shall ensure that the inspection schedules are faithfully followed

by supervisory level functionaries.

10. Other Matters: Panchayati Raj Department shall be responsible for clarifying doubts, if

any, and ensure that the bottlenecks in the implementation of the scheme are

removed as expeditiously as possible and communicated to all concerned.

11. The Resolution No.25997-II-Dev-6/2010 dt. 4th September, 2010 is

hereby superseded. The present Resolution will be effective from 1st April,

2013.

Order-Ordered that this Resolution be published in the Extraordinary Gazette of the

Government of Odisha for general information and copy be communicated to

all the Departments of Government and other concerned.

By order of he Governor

APARAJI

Commissio um-Secretary

to GOV1fTi'\

Page-60(6

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION OF CEMENT CONCRETE ROAD

( 3.0M WIDE IN BLACK COTTON SOIL AREA)

EARTH FILLING

100MM THICK C.C (1 :2:4) 100MM THICK C.C ( 1 :3:6)

200MM THICK SAND FILLING 3.0% SLOPE_

GROUND LEVEL

ALL DIMINESIONS ARE IN MM

ESTIMATED COST :-RS 33.20 LAKHS/KM

~\'\~ ~

EARTH FILLING

I '. •

;,

ANNEXURE:-A

(£' .,)

Length 1000.00 Mtr Width 3.00 MIT

A Estimate for the Work, " Construction of CC road with off wall ( 3.0 M wide In Black cotton soil

Est.Cost - Rs 3320000.00

Item of Worl<

Fme dressing of eanh

work in ordinary or hard

soi l in road formaton

according to the direction

of the department including

cutting or filling eanh upto 0.15m depth of surface.

1 x 1000.00 X 3.000 X 3000.00 Sqm

@ Rs 153.00 1100 Sqm Rs 4590.00 2 Earth work in exavation in

hard soil with initial lead and lift including dressing &Ievelling the foundation bed and depositing the exavated earth away from work site etc. complete.

Cu1 off wall 2 x 1000.00 X 0.225 X 0.15 67.50 Cum

67.50 Cum @ Rs 78.95/cum Rs 5329.00

3 Filling foundation and plinth with sand well watered and rammed etc. complete.

C.C.Road Base ;- 2 x 1000.00 X 1.275 X 0.22 567.38 Cum Cut off wall 3x 1000.00 X 0.225 X 0.05 = 33.75 Cum

601 .13 Cum @ Rs 237.01 leum Rs 142474.00

4 Cement concrete of prop.(1 :3:6) using 4cm. Size H.G.(C.8':) metal in foundation etc. complete.

C.C.Road 1 x 1000.00 X 2.55 X 0.10 = 255.00 Cum Cut off wall 2x 1000.00 X 0.225 X 0.40 = 180.00 Cum

435.00 Cum @ Rs 3575.95 leum Rs 1555540.00

5 Cement Concrete of prop. (1 :2:4) using 12 mm size Cr.b.h.g. chips including cost of all materials & labour T&P etc. complete.

C.C.Road (Wearing Coat) :- 1 x 1000.00 X 3.00 X 0.10 300.00 Cum 300.00 Cum

@ Rs 4636.34 leum Rs 1390902.00 7 Rigid and smooth centering

and shuttering etc

2x 1000.00 X 0.30 600.00 sqm 2 x 1000.00 X 0.40 800.00 sqm

1400.00 sqm @ Rs 68.20/Sqm Rs 95480.00

8 Hire charges of vibrator Total concrete = 735.00 Cum

~,~:?

.L

")

& Provid ing Salilex Board to the expansion joints

10 Earth work in ordinary soil with 5 KM mechanical carriage etc

Side berm filling

11 Add for unforseen item if any

12 Add Cess :-

13 Provision for Display Board 14 Add W.C.

@2.5 Cumlhr; 294.00 Hrs

@ Rs 106.00/Hr Rs 12466.00

200 x 3.00 x 0.10 ; 60.00 Sqm

or 5.574 sqm

@ Rs 593.00/sqm Rs 3305.00

2 x 1000.00 X 0.25 X 0040 200.00 Cum

@ Rs 151.90 /cum

L.S (Subject to actual)

Or Say

Rs 30380.00

LS 5000.00

Rs 33200.00 Rs 5000.00 Rs 33200.00 Rs 3316866.00

Rs 3320.000.00

I I

"

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION OF CEMENT CONCRETE ROAD WTH cun OFF

( 3.0M WIDE IN HARD SOIL AREA)

OOMM THICK C.C ( 1 :2:4) 1 OOMM THICK C.C ( 1 :3:6)

OOMM THICK SAND FILLING

GROUND LEVEL

EARTH FILLING

ALL DIMINESIONS ARE IN MM

ESTIMATED COST :-RS 32.30 LAKHS/KM

~~~ ~)

EARTH FILLING

'" ....,

ANNEXURE:-B I

..r ~

-

r

length 1000.00 Mtr Width 3.00 Mtr

B Estimate for the Worle, " Cons truction of CC ,·oad with off wall ( 3.0 M wide In Hard soil area).

Est.Cost -SJ.

Item ofWotX No

Fine dressing of earth work in ordinary or hard soil in road formaton according to the direction of the department

including cutting or filling earth upto O.l5m

depth of surface.

1 x 1000.00 X 3.000 X 3000.00 Sqm

@ Rs 153.00 1100 Sqm Rs 4590.00 2 Earth work in exavation in

hard soil with initial lead and lift induding dressing &Ievelling the foundation bed and depositing the exavated earth away from work site etc. complete.

Cut off wall 2x 1000.00 X 0.225 X 0.25 112.50 Cum

112.50 Cum

@ Rs 78.95 /cum Rs 8882.00 3 Filling foundation and pfinth

with sand well watered and rammed etc. complete.

C.C.Road Base ;- 2x 1000.00 X 1.275 X 0.12 312.38 Cum Cut off wall 3x 1000.00 X 0.225 X 0.05 33.75 Cum

346.13 Cum

@ Rs 237.01 lcum Rs 82037.00 4 Cement concrete of

prop.(l :3:6) using 4cm. Size H.G.(C.B.) metal in foundation etc. complete.

C.C.Road 1 x 1000.00 X 2.55 X 0.10 255.00 Cum Cut off wall 2x 1000.00 X 0.225 X 0.40 180.00 Cum

435.00 Cum @ Rs 3575.95 lcum Rs 1555540.00

5 Cement Conaete of prop. (1 :2:4) using 12 mm size Cr.b.h.g. chips including cost of all materials & labour T&P etc. complete.

C.C.Road (Wearing Coal) :- 1 x 1000.00 X 3.00 X 0.10 300.00 Cum

300.00 Cum @ Rs 4638.34 lcum Rs 1390902.00

7 Rigid and smooth centering and shuttering etc

2x 1000.00 X 0.30 600.00 sqm 2x 1000.00 X 0.20 400.00 sqm

1000.00 sqm @ Rs 68.20/Sqm Rs 68200.00

8 Hire charges of vibrator Total concrete = 735.00 Cum

@2.5 Cumlhr 294.00 H", @ Rs 106.00 IHr Rs 12468.00

9 Providing Salitex Board to the expansion jOints

*\'I';)P\~

10 Earth wor1< in ordinary soil 'Nith 5 KM mechanical carriage etc

Side berm filling

11 Add for unforseen item if any

12 Add Cess :-13 Provision for Display Board

14 Add W.C.

200 x

2 x

3.00

@

1000.00 @

x

Rs

X Rs

0.10 =

593 .00/sqm

0.25 X 151.90 lcum

L.S (Subject to actual)

60.00

0.30

Sqm or

Or

5574

150.00 Cum

Say

sqm Rs 3305.00

Rs 22785.00

LS 10000.00

Rs 32300.00

Rs 5000.00 Rs 32300.00 Rs 3228307.00

Rs 3230000.00

final report - odisha _road.pdf · 2019-03-15 · and blocks spread across the state to prepare a...

Documents