Asset Management

Cover of Sustainable Roads Through Fit‑for‑purpose Use of Available Materials: Evaluation Tool and User Guide
Sustainable Roads Through Fit‑for‑purpose Use of Available Materials: Evaluation Tool and User Guide
  • Publication no: AP-T353-20
  • ISBN: 978-1-925854-91-6
  • Published: 11 March 2020

This guidance document aims to encourage fit‑for‑purpose use of available materials for sealed and unsealed road construction and maintenance, including renewal of low to medium level traffic roads.

A fit‑for‑purpose material has properties and performance characteristics which are directly suited to the chosen design application. The use of a fit-for-purpose material ensures budget resources are optimised over the entire life cycle of the pavement, while continuing to meet a required level of service.

Understanding what influences material performance and how to balance this with budget optimisation and level‑of‑service requirements are key to a fit-for-purpose material.

  • Summary
  • 1. Introduction
    • 1.1 Background
    • 1.2 Scope and Purpose of This Project
    • 1.3 Purpose of This Document
    • 1.4 Structure and Contents of This Document
  • 2. Assessment Process and Purpose(s)
    • 2.1 Introduction to the Process
    • 2.2 Assessment Purpose and Examples
    • 2.3 Critical Ideas
  • 3. Material Risk Assessment
    • 3.1 Material Information
      • 3.1.1 Material Source
      • 3.1.2 Material Properties
    • 3.2 Load Information
      • 3.2.1 Moisture
      • 3.2.2 Traffic
    • 3.3 Assessing Material Risk
      • 3.3.1 Sealed or Unsealed
      • 3.3.2 Traffic Conditions
      • 3.3.3 Moisture Probability
      • 3.3.4 Risk Assessment Category
      • 3.3.5 Material Category: Sealed Roads
      • 3.3.6 Risk Assessment
      • 3.3.7 Good Practice Techniques
    • 3.4 Critical Ideas
  • 4. Material Options Assessment
    • 4.1 Risk Reduction Options
      • 4.1.1 Material Management
      • 4.1.2 Moisture Management
    • 4.2 Assessing Material Options
    • 4.3 Revised Design Information
    • 4.4 Critical Ideas
  • 5. Life-cycle Cost Assessment
    • 5.1 Level of Service
      • 5.1.1 Operating Criteria
      • 5.1.2 Performance Criteria for Sealed Roads
      • 5.1.3 Additional Functionality Requirements
    • 5.2 Road Performance Models
      • 5.2.1 General
      • 5.2.2 Sealed Road Deterioration and Works Effects Models
      • 5.2.3 Unsealed Road Deterioration and Works Effects Models
    • 5.3 Economic Costs and Option Selection
      • 5.3.1 General
      • 5.3.2 Road Agency Costs
      • 5.3.3 Road User Costs (RUC)
      • 5.3.4 Sources of Cost Savings
    • 5.4 Critical Ideas
  • References
  • Appendix A Performance Risk Assessment
  • Appendix B Case Studies
    • B.1 Gascoyne Region, Western Australia
      • B.1.1 Risk Assessment Input Data and Outcome
      • B.1.2 Options Assessment
      • B.1.3 Comparison of Options
      • B.1.4 Options Rating
      • B.1.5 Revised Information
    • B.2 Goldfields-Esperance Region, Western Australia
      • B.2.1 Risk Assessment Input Data and Outcome
      • B.2.2 Options Assessment – Regional Roads
      • B.2.3 Comparison of Options
      • B.2.4 Options Rating
      • B.2.5 Revised Information
      • B.2.6 Options Assessment – City Centre Road (Esperance)
      • B.2.7 Comparison of Options
      • B.2.8 Options Rating
      • B.2.9 Revised Information
    • B.3 Central West Region, Queensland
      • B.3.1 Overview
      • B.3.2 Performance Trends
      • B.3.3 Economic Analysis
      • B.3.4 Further Development of This Case Study
    • B.4 Cassowary Coast, Queensland
      • B.4.1 Overview
      • B.4.2 Observed Performance
      • B.4.3 Life-cycle Analysis
    • B.5 Colac Otway Region, Victoria
      • B.5.1 Overview
      • B.5.2 Types and Properties of Available Materials
      • B.5.3 Investigation of Blended Materials
    • B.6 Port Macquarie-Hastings, New South Wales
      • B.6.1 Overview
      • B.6.2 Results of Desktop Blending Analysis