Comprehensive Review of Haul Road Design Methods: a Comparative Approach

The mining industry, primarily coal mines, has grown significantly, leading to heavy traffic on haul roads. However, inadequately designed haul roads often result in problems. The objective of the present study is to review and design the haul road using existing design methods and analyze their pav...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of Mining Sciences 2024-09, Vol.69 (3), p.529-554
Hauptverfasser: Gouda, Jagdish, Rami Reddy, D. Sita, Srinivasan, V., Butle, Vaibhav
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; pol
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The mining industry, primarily coal mines, has grown significantly, leading to heavy traffic on haul roads. However, inadequately designed haul roads often result in problems. The objective of the present study is to review and design the haul road using existing design methods and analyze their pavement design parameters. The study compares haul road design methods, including empirical California Bearing Ratio (CBR) methods, design charts, mechanistic design approach, and geocell reinforced design. This research enhances understanding of effective haul road design methods considering layer thicknesses, vertical strain, and deflections, thereby ascertaining the overall performance and suitability of each design approach. The mechanistic and reinforced design approaches emphasize pavement safety, significantly reducing vertical compressive strain. By using IITPAVE software, an optimal haul road design was found by finding vertical strains and deflections of various designs. Vertical strains ranged from 1238 to 3700 µε, with 1.5 to 4.5 mm deflections. The outcomes indicate that both the mechanistic and reinforced approaches meet the criteria for critical strain limits (CSL). This study highlights the advantages of different design approaches to ensure cost-effectiveness.
ISSN:0860-7001
1689-0469
DOI:10.24425/ams.2024.151449