Q: Rigid pavement theory: If E is the modulus of elasticity of concrete (kg/cm²), d the slab thickness (cm), μ the Poisson's ratio of concrete, and k the subgrade modulus (kg/cm³), the radius of relative stiffness r (cm) is

Introduction / Context: The radius of relative stiffness r is a key parameter in Westergaard’s analysis of concrete pavements. It quantifies how a slab spreads a wheel load over the subgrade, controlling interior, edge, and corner stresses and deflections. Given Data / Assumptions: E: modulus of elasticity of concrete (kg/cm²). d: slab thickness (cm). μ: Poisson’s ratio of concrete (dimensionless). k: subgrade reaction modulus (kg/cm³). Homogeneous isotropic slab on a Winkler foundation. Concept / Approach: The classical closed-form relation for r arises from balancing bending stiffness of the plate (E * d^3 / 12 / (1 - μ^2)) with the elastic spring support k. The dimensional combination that yields length is the fourth-root of stiffness-to-foundation ratio. Step-by-Step Solution: Plate bending stiffness D = E * d^3 / (12 * (1 - μ^2))Relative stiffness r satisfies r^4 = D / kTherefore r = [E * d^3 / (12 * k * (1 - μ^2))]^(1/4) Verification / Alternative check: Check units: D has units kg·cm, dividing by k (kg/cm³) gives cm^4; fourth root yields cm, confirming dimensional consistency. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B is the inverse; it would make stiffer slabs produce smaller r, which is non-physical. Options C, D, and E use incorrect powers and combinations; they do not produce correct dimensions or behavior trends. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting the (1 − μ^2) term from plate theory. Mixing SI and metric units without converting k consistently. Final Answer: r = [E * d^3 / (12 * k * (1 - μ^2))]^(1/4).

Q: Tractive effort on upgrades: For computing tractive force on an asphalt road upgrade, the most probable coefficient of traction (rolling) resistance μ is typically assumed as

Introduction / Context: Estimating tractive effort is essential for checking vehicle performance on grades, sizing engines, and verifying hill road feasibility. The force must overcome rolling (traction) resistance, grade resistance, and any aerodynamic and acceleration components. A representative coefficient for rolling resistance is needed for asphalt surfaces. Given Data / Assumptions: Pavement: bituminous (asphalt), in good condition. Speed: moderate highway speeds; tires properly inflated. Objective: pick a typical coefficient μ for rolling (traction) resistance. Concept / Approach: For paved, smooth asphalt, μ for rolling resistance commonly lies around 0.015 to 0.025. Design calculations often round to 0.02 as a representative value for normal conditions, balancing conservatism and realism. On rougher surfaces or gravel, μ is larger; on concrete in excellent condition, it may be slightly lower. Step-by-Step Solution: Tractive effort T ≈ W * (μ + i + aerodynamic term + acceleration term)For baseline rolling resistance on asphalt → adopt μ ≈ 0.02Use this μ with the grade i (in rise/run) in detailed computations. Verification / Alternative check: Vehicle performance handbooks and highway engineering texts list μ values near 0.02 for smooth, paved asphalt under normal conditions. Sensitivity checks with μ = 0.015 and μ = 0.025 confirm limited variation for moderate grades. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 0.01: unusually low for typical asphalt; optimistic. 0.03–0.05: more suited to rough, gravel, or soft surfaces; pessimistic for good asphalt. Common Pitfalls: Confusing rolling resistance with coefficient of lateral friction used in superelevation design. Ignoring speed and tire effects when refining μ for specific projects. Final Answer: 0.02.

Q: Nagpur recommendations (rural two-way): The recommended width of paved carriageway for two-directional traffic, in addition to gravelled berms 1 m wide on either side, is approximately

Introduction / Context: Historic Indian highway standards (Nagpur Conference) provided baseline carriageway and shoulder widths for rural roads. For two-way, two-lane traffic on lower to moderate volumes, a standard paved width with gravelled berms was recommended to balance safety and economy. Given Data / Assumptions: Two-directional traffic on a rural road. Gravelled berms of 1 m provided on both sides (total 2 m of berm). Carriageway width sought (paved portion only). Concept / Approach: Under the Nagpur plan era recommendations, a typical two-lane rural carriageway width near 5.5 m was common. In metric rounded values used in many texts and question banks, 5.5–5.7 m appears, paired with 1 m gravelled berms each side to give adequate total formation width and lateral safety margin. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Identify the standard two-lane rural carriageway width → ≈ 5.5 to 5.7 m.Add berm information (already given but not part of the paved width).Select the nearest listed paved width → 5.7 m. Verification / Alternative check: Later standards (IRC) refine widths based on lane width (for example 3.5 m per lane), but the referenced historical recommendation in this question aligns with ≈5.5–5.7 m paved width for two-way traffic on lower-volume roads. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 4.7 m: too narrow for comfortable two-lane operations. 6.7–8.7 m: represent wider facilities or multi-lane/bus-bay provisions, not the classic baseline. Common Pitfalls: Confusing total formation or ROW with paved width. Mixing modern lane standards with older plan recommendations without context. Final Answer: 5.7 m.

Q: Shoulder crossfall and camber: which of the following statements are correct for highway crossfall design?

Introduction / Context: Crossfall (transverse slope) ensures rapid drainage, preventing water film formation that causes skidding, potholes, and structural damage. Shoulders, being unpaved or of different surface texture, require slightly steeper slopes to shed water efficiently. Given Data / Assumptions: Paved carriageway with camber in tangent sections; superelevation on curves. Shoulders provided on both sides; material may be earthen or granular. Objective is quick runoff without erosion or driver discomfort. Concept / Approach: Because shoulders are rougher and permeable, they are sloped a little more than the paved surface to preclude ponding at the edge joint. On superelevated curves, maintaining the same slope on shoulders as the pavement avoids an abrupt lip at the edge and ensures continuity of drainage. Earthen roads need relatively high crossfall to counter lower surface permeability and to protect the formation from water ingress. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Compare shoulder crossfall with camber → adopt shoulder crossfall at least camber + 0.5%.At superelevation → match shoulder crossfall with pavement cross slope to maintain edge continuity.Surface type vs crossfall → earthen roads require steepest crossfall. Verification / Alternative check: Design guides routinely show shoulders 0.5% to 1.0% steeper than carriageway on tangents, and equal crossfall on curves with superelevation. Earthen roads carry 3%–6% (or more) crossfall depending on climate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each statement independently reflects accepted practice; therefore “All the above” is correct. Common Pitfalls: Leaving flat shoulders that trap runoff at the pavement edge. Creating a step between superelevated pavement and shoulder, which is hazardous. Final Answer: All the above.

Q: Overtaking sight distance (OSD): While computing OSD on two-lane roads, the height of the visible object above the road surface is assumed as

Introduction / Context: Overtaking sight distance (OSD) ensures a driver can overtake slower traffic safely while seeing an opposing vehicle in time to abort or complete the maneuver. Standard eye and object heights are assumed to reflect typical driver seating and the height of the opposing driver’s eye or vehicle silhouette. Given Data / Assumptions: Two-lane, two-way roadway. Typical design values for eye and object heights are used. Undulating terrain may limit visibility; hence conservative assumptions are needed. Concept / Approach: In OSD calculations, both the overtaking driver’s eye height and the object height are commonly taken as 1.2 m (120 cm). This represents the opposing driver’s eye or a typical vehicle height that remains visible above the crest of a vertical curve. It differs from stopping sight distance (SSD), where the object height is much lower (for example, 0.15 m) to represent small obstacles. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Identify the maneuver → overtaking with possibility of an opposing vehicle.Adopt standard eye height → ≈ 1.2 m.Adopt standard object height for OSD → ≈ 1.2 m (120 cm). Verification / Alternative check: Sight-distance envelopes drawn for crest vertical curves show that using 1.2 m for both eye and object provides a symmetric line of sight criterion suitable for two-way roads. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Zero/50/75/100 cm: too low for representing an opposing driver’s eye; these are used in other contexts (for example SSD uses a small object height). Common Pitfalls: Using SSD assumptions for OSD leads to underestimation of required visibility and unsafe designs. Final Answer: 120 cm.

Q: Basic rural access: According to Nagpur Conference recommendations, the minimum single-lane width commonly adopted for a village road is

Introduction / Context: Village roads serve low-volume local traffic, agricultural vehicles, and short-trip passenger movements. Historical Indian standards provided economical single-lane widths for such roads while ensuring basic two-way meeting maneuvers can be managed at lay-bys or widened spots. Given Data / Assumptions: Village road, low traffic volume, mixed small vehicles. Single-lane movement with occasional passing at designated areas. Legacy recommendations from the Nagpur plan era. Concept / Approach: For economy, a minimal paved width near 2.7–2.75 m was recommended for village roads. This width permits safe operation of typical rural vehicles at low speeds while relying on shoulders or turnouts for meeting opposing traffic. Wider standards (3.66 m, 4.9 m) correspond to higher classes of roads or multi-lane facilities. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Identify road class → village road (lowest class in rural hierarchy).Adopt minimal single-lane width from historic recommendations → ≈ 2.75 m.Confirm that shoulders or berms supplement the narrow paved width for meeting/passing. Verification / Alternative check: Subsequent IRC guidelines continue to permit narrow single-lane rural widths in special contexts, although many modern programs aim for wider all-weather links. The value 2.75 m remains a recognized historical benchmark. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 2.45 m: extremely narrow for safe operation. 3.66 m: typical single-lane for higher standards or minimum for comfortable operation, not the historical minimum for village roads. 4.90–5.00 m: multi-lane or higher-class road widths. Common Pitfalls: Confusing minimum legacy recommendations with modern programmatic targets; the question refers to Nagpur-era guidance. Final Answer: 2.75 m.

Question 1

Water–cement ratio and concrete strength: identify the incorrect statement (choose one) about how changing w/c affects strength.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The water–cement (w/c) ratio is the single most influential parameter governing the strength and durability of fully compacted, properly cured concrete. Understanding its effect helps in mix design and quality control. Given Data / Assumptions: Statements concern qualitative effect of changing w/c on strength. Normal, well-graded mixes with proper compaction and curing. No admixtures or special concretes unless implied. Concept / Approach: According to classic relationships (e.g., Abram’s law), for a given cement and conditions, concrete strength decreases as w/c increases because higher water content leaves more capillary voids after hydration. Conversely, reducing w/c (with adequate compaction and workability provision) raises strength up to practical limits. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Evaluate (a): Increasing w/c decreases strength → correct.Evaluate (b): Decreasing w/c increases strength (to a limit) → correct.Evaluate (c): There is a practical lower bound (too low w/c harms workability/compaction), so an effective optimum exists → correct.Evaluate (d): Higher w/c increases porosity → lower strength → correct. Verification / Alternative check: Empirical strength–w/c curves show monotonic strength reduction with increasing w/c for properly compacted mixes. Practical mix design also recognizes workability limits at very low w/c. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Since (a)–(d) are all correct qualitative statements, none are incorrect; therefore “None of these” is the only option that matches the prompt to “pick the incorrect statement.” Common Pitfalls: Assuming strength always increases simply by adding more water; neglecting the role of compaction and curing; forgetting that too-low w/c without admixtures can reduce achieved strength due to poor compaction. Final Answer: None of these.

Question 2

Hairpin bend on a mountain road: which of the following geometric provisions are correct for a standard one-lane hairpin (switchback) on a highway in hilly terrain?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Hairpin bends (also called switchbacks) are sharp 180-degree turns used on hill roads to gain elevation within limited horizontal distance. Highway geometric design in mountainous terrain sets minimum values for curve radius, transition length, and widened roadway at the apex to maintain safety, comfort, and operability for mixed traffic and heavy vehicles. Given Data / Assumptions: Single-lane hairpin bend on a hill road. Standard practice values are being referenced for minimum inner radius, transition length, and apex widening. The alignment may require a compound circular curve to fit topography while keeping speeds low and sight distance adequate. Concept / Approach: The inner curve radius ensures that even at very low speeds, vehicles can negotiate the turn without excessive side friction or encroachment. Transition curves help vehicles gradually develop superelevation and change in curvature. Extra width at the apex accommodates off-tracking of longer wheelbase vehicles (like buses and trucks) and the lateral placement variability of drivers. Step-by-Step Solution: Check inner radius guideline → about 14 m for a single-lane hairpin to accommodate turning paths.Check transition length → about 15 m is a practical minimum to introduce curvature and superelevation progressively.Check alignment form → compound circular curves are commonly used to fit hillside geometry and meet sight distance constraints.Check apex widening → about 9 m minimum roadway width at the apex improves safety and maneuverability. Verification / Alternative check: Model the swept path for the design vehicle (for example, a bus) on the given radius and evaluate lateral clearance and mountable shoulder needs. The listed values provide satisfactory envelope clearances in standard practice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each individual statement reflects accepted minimums; hence the combined correct choice is “All the above”. Common Pitfalls: Providing standard two-lane widths at hairpins without extra apex widening can cause encroachment and side-swipe risks. Omitting a transition leads to sudden curvature entry, increasing skidding risk on wet surfaces. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 3

Traffic flow terminology: The maximum number of vehicles that can pass a given point on a lane in one hour without causing unreasonable delay is called the…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Roadway capacity concepts differentiate between theoretical maxima and what is realistically achievable in daily operations. Designers use these concepts to evaluate level of service and to plan lane additions, intersections, and control strategies. Given Data / Assumptions: An hourly rate of vehicles passing a point is being considered. “Without unreasonable delay” implies real-world operating conditions rather than idealized ones. Lane-level analysis is intended (single lane in one direction). Concept / Approach: Basic capacity is the theoretical maximum under ideal conditions (perfect drivers, vehicles, weather, alignment, and control). Practical capacity (sometimes called possible or service capacity) is lower and reflects the highest flow rate that can be sustained with acceptable operational comfort and without excessive delay or breakdown of flow. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify key phrase → “without unreasonable delay”.Map to definition → aligns with practical capacity rather than basic capacity.Therefore, the correct term is “practical capacity of the lane”. Verification / Alternative check: When plotted on a speed–flow curve, practical capacity corresponds to the peak of serviceable throughput before speeds drop sharply and delays escalate, unlike basic capacity which assumes ideal, rarely attainable conditions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Traffic density: vehicles per unit length at an instant, not a throughput rate. Basic capacity: ignores real-world frictions; does not mention delay acceptability. Probable capacity: non-standard term; ambiguous. Common Pitfalls: Confusing flow rate (veh/h) with density (veh/km) or speed (km/h). Assuming the maximum theoretical number equals acceptable operations; it often does not. Final Answer: Practical capacity of the lane.

Question 4

Vehicle dynamics on pavements: The distance indicated by wheel revolutions that exceeds the true ground distance travelled is termed…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Understanding slip and skid helps diagnose traction, braking, and surface conditions on pavements. These phenomena affect stopping distances, tire wear, and collision risk, and inform design choices for gradients, surface textures, and drainage. Given Data / Assumptions: A wheel’s revolution count is used to estimate distance. Measured “revolution distance” is greater than the true ground distance covered. Normal driving (not locked-wheel emergency braking) is implied. Concept / Approach: Slip occurs when the drive wheels rotate faster than the ground distance warrants (for example, on an upgrade or low-friction surface), so the indicated distance by rotations is larger than actual. Skid occurs when wheels slide with little or no rotation (for example, under heavy braking), so the actual distance travelled exceeds what wheel rotations indicate. Step-by-Step Solution: Compare indicated distance (via wheel turns) with true ground distance.If indicated > actual → condition is “slip”.If indicated < actual (lock-up) → condition would be “skid”. Verification / Alternative check: On steep upgrades or on snow, tires may spin; odometers over-read distance, matching the definition of slip. During braking with wheel lock, the odometer under-reads; that is characteristic skid. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Skid: opposite sign; wheels rotate less than distance. Neither / Both: definitions are mutually exclusive for a given instant. Common Pitfalls: Using the terms interchangeably; they reflect different tire–pavement interactions. Ignoring surface macrotexture and microtexture effects on traction. Final Answer: Slip.

Question 5

Superelevation development: Before rotating the carriageway to provide superelevation, the portion between the crown and the outer edge is first made…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Superelevation tilts the pavement to counteract lateral acceleration on curves, improving safety and comfort. The process of developing superelevation from a crowned section to a fully rotated surface must be staged to avoid abrupt crossfall changes and water ponding. Given Data / Assumptions: Two-lane crowned pavement transitioning into a curve. Standard method is by rotating about the centerline or the inner edge depending on practice. Drainage and ride comfort are key constraints. Concept / Approach: In the commonly adopted method, the outer half of the carriageway is raised progressively. The first action is to eliminate the adverse camber on the outer half by bringing the segment between crown and outer edge to a horizontal line. Subsequent rotation then provides the required outward upward cross slope. Step-by-Step Solution: Start with a crowned section (two-way camber).Raise the outer half to eliminate its downward camber → this makes the portion from crown to outer edge horizontal.Continue raising the outer edge to achieve the design superelevation e (for example, e = v^2/(225 R) for metric units). Verification / Alternative check: Profile templates and field superelevation runouts show an initial “zeroing” of the outer half crossfall before adding the designed tilt, thereby preventing a sharp kink and ensuring drainage continuity. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Reduced fall: still leaves adverse camber; not the standard first step. Same slope as inner half: would double crown height; not intended. None of these: incorrect because the established first step is to make it horizontal. Common Pitfalls: Too short a transition length causes abrupt crossfall changes and discomfort. Ignoring shoulder crossfall adjustments alongside the carriageway. Final Answer: Horizontal (leveled from crown to outer edge).

Question 6

Rigid pavement theory: If E is the modulus of elasticity of concrete (kg/cm²), d the slab thickness (cm), μ the Poisson's ratio of concrete, and k the subgrade modulus (kg/cm³), the radius of relative stiffness r (cm) is

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The radius of relative stiffness r is a key parameter in Westergaard’s analysis of concrete pavements. It quantifies how a slab spreads a wheel load over the subgrade, controlling interior, edge, and corner stresses and deflections. Given Data / Assumptions: E: modulus of elasticity of concrete (kg/cm²). d: slab thickness (cm). μ: Poisson’s ratio of concrete (dimensionless). k: subgrade reaction modulus (kg/cm³). Homogeneous isotropic slab on a Winkler foundation. Concept / Approach: The classical closed-form relation for r arises from balancing bending stiffness of the plate (E * d^3 / 12 / (1 - μ^2)) with the elastic spring support k. The dimensional combination that yields length is the fourth-root of stiffness-to-foundation ratio. Step-by-Step Solution: Plate bending stiffness D = E * d^3 / (12 * (1 - μ^2))Relative stiffness r satisfies r^4 = D / kTherefore r = [E * d^3 / (12 * k * (1 - μ^2))]^(1/4) Verification / Alternative check: Check units: D has units kg·cm, dividing by k (kg/cm³) gives cm^4; fourth root yields cm, confirming dimensional consistency. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B is the inverse; it would make stiffer slabs produce smaller r, which is non-physical. Options C, D, and E use incorrect powers and combinations; they do not produce correct dimensions or behavior trends. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting the (1 − μ^2) term from plate theory. Mixing SI and metric units without converting k consistently. Final Answer: r = [E * d^3 / (12 * k * (1 - μ^2))]^(1/4).

Question 7

Tractive effort on upgrades: For computing tractive force on an asphalt road upgrade, the most probable coefficient of traction (rolling) resistance μ is typically assumed as

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Estimating tractive effort is essential for checking vehicle performance on grades, sizing engines, and verifying hill road feasibility. The force must overcome rolling (traction) resistance, grade resistance, and any aerodynamic and acceleration components. A representative coefficient for rolling resistance is needed for asphalt surfaces. Given Data / Assumptions: Pavement: bituminous (asphalt), in good condition. Speed: moderate highway speeds; tires properly inflated. Objective: pick a typical coefficient μ for rolling (traction) resistance. Concept / Approach: For paved, smooth asphalt, μ for rolling resistance commonly lies around 0.015 to 0.025. Design calculations often round to 0.02 as a representative value for normal conditions, balancing conservatism and realism. On rougher surfaces or gravel, μ is larger; on concrete in excellent condition, it may be slightly lower. Step-by-Step Solution: Tractive effort T ≈ W * (μ + i + aerodynamic term + acceleration term)For baseline rolling resistance on asphalt → adopt μ ≈ 0.02Use this μ with the grade i (in rise/run) in detailed computations. Verification / Alternative check: Vehicle performance handbooks and highway engineering texts list μ values near 0.02 for smooth, paved asphalt under normal conditions. Sensitivity checks with μ = 0.015 and μ = 0.025 confirm limited variation for moderate grades. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 0.01: unusually low for typical asphalt; optimistic. 0.03–0.05: more suited to rough, gravel, or soft surfaces; pessimistic for good asphalt. Common Pitfalls: Confusing rolling resistance with coefficient of lateral friction used in superelevation design. Ignoring speed and tire effects when refining μ for specific projects. Final Answer: 0.02.

Question 8

Nagpur recommendations (rural two-way): The recommended width of paved carriageway for two-directional traffic, in addition to gravelled berms 1 m wide on either side, is approximately

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Historic Indian highway standards (Nagpur Conference) provided baseline carriageway and shoulder widths for rural roads. For two-way, two-lane traffic on lower to moderate volumes, a standard paved width with gravelled berms was recommended to balance safety and economy. Given Data / Assumptions: Two-directional traffic on a rural road. Gravelled berms of 1 m provided on both sides (total 2 m of berm). Carriageway width sought (paved portion only). Concept / Approach: Under the Nagpur plan era recommendations, a typical two-lane rural carriageway width near 5.5 m was common. In metric rounded values used in many texts and question banks, 5.5–5.7 m appears, paired with 1 m gravelled berms each side to give adequate total formation width and lateral safety margin. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Identify the standard two-lane rural carriageway width → ≈ 5.5 to 5.7 m.Add berm information (already given but not part of the paved width).Select the nearest listed paved width → 5.7 m. Verification / Alternative check: Later standards (IRC) refine widths based on lane width (for example 3.5 m per lane), but the referenced historical recommendation in this question aligns with ≈5.5–5.7 m paved width for two-way traffic on lower-volume roads. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 4.7 m: too narrow for comfortable two-lane operations. 6.7–8.7 m: represent wider facilities or multi-lane/bus-bay provisions, not the classic baseline. Common Pitfalls: Confusing total formation or ROW with paved width. Mixing modern lane standards with older plan recommendations without context. Final Answer: 5.7 m.

Question 9

Shoulder crossfall and camber: which of the following statements are correct for highway crossfall design?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Crossfall (transverse slope) ensures rapid drainage, preventing water film formation that causes skidding, potholes, and structural damage. Shoulders, being unpaved or of different surface texture, require slightly steeper slopes to shed water efficiently. Given Data / Assumptions: Paved carriageway with camber in tangent sections; superelevation on curves. Shoulders provided on both sides; material may be earthen or granular. Objective is quick runoff without erosion or driver discomfort. Concept / Approach: Because shoulders are rougher and permeable, they are sloped a little more than the paved surface to preclude ponding at the edge joint. On superelevated curves, maintaining the same slope on shoulders as the pavement avoids an abrupt lip at the edge and ensures continuity of drainage. Earthen roads need relatively high crossfall to counter lower surface permeability and to protect the formation from water ingress. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Compare shoulder crossfall with camber → adopt shoulder crossfall at least camber + 0.5%.At superelevation → match shoulder crossfall with pavement cross slope to maintain edge continuity.Surface type vs crossfall → earthen roads require steepest crossfall. Verification / Alternative check: Design guides routinely show shoulders 0.5% to 1.0% steeper than carriageway on tangents, and equal crossfall on curves with superelevation. Earthen roads carry 3%–6% (or more) crossfall depending on climate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each statement independently reflects accepted practice; therefore “All the above” is correct. Common Pitfalls: Leaving flat shoulders that trap runoff at the pavement edge. Creating a step between superelevated pavement and shoulder, which is hazardous. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 10

Overtaking sight distance (OSD): While computing OSD on two-lane roads, the height of the visible object above the road surface is assumed as

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Overtaking sight distance (OSD) ensures a driver can overtake slower traffic safely while seeing an opposing vehicle in time to abort or complete the maneuver. Standard eye and object heights are assumed to reflect typical driver seating and the height of the opposing driver’s eye or vehicle silhouette. Given Data / Assumptions: Two-lane, two-way roadway. Typical design values for eye and object heights are used. Undulating terrain may limit visibility; hence conservative assumptions are needed. Concept / Approach: In OSD calculations, both the overtaking driver’s eye height and the object height are commonly taken as 1.2 m (120 cm). This represents the opposing driver’s eye or a typical vehicle height that remains visible above the crest of a vertical curve. It differs from stopping sight distance (SSD), where the object height is much lower (for example, 0.15 m) to represent small obstacles. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Identify the maneuver → overtaking with possibility of an opposing vehicle.Adopt standard eye height → ≈ 1.2 m.Adopt standard object height for OSD → ≈ 1.2 m (120 cm). Verification / Alternative check: Sight-distance envelopes drawn for crest vertical curves show that using 1.2 m for both eye and object provides a symmetric line of sight criterion suitable for two-way roads. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Zero/50/75/100 cm: too low for representing an opposing driver’s eye; these are used in other contexts (for example SSD uses a small object height). Common Pitfalls: Using SSD assumptions for OSD leads to underestimation of required visibility and unsafe designs. Final Answer: 120 cm.

Question 11

Basic rural access: According to Nagpur Conference recommendations, the minimum single-lane width commonly adopted for a village road is

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Village roads serve low-volume local traffic, agricultural vehicles, and short-trip passenger movements. Historical Indian standards provided economical single-lane widths for such roads while ensuring basic two-way meeting maneuvers can be managed at lay-bys or widened spots. Given Data / Assumptions: Village road, low traffic volume, mixed small vehicles. Single-lane movement with occasional passing at designated areas. Legacy recommendations from the Nagpur plan era. Concept / Approach: For economy, a minimal paved width near 2.7–2.75 m was recommended for village roads. This width permits safe operation of typical rural vehicles at low speeds while relying on shoulders or turnouts for meeting opposing traffic. Wider standards (3.66 m, 4.9 m) correspond to higher classes of roads or multi-lane facilities. Step-by-Step Reasoning: Identify road class → village road (lowest class in rural hierarchy).Adopt minimal single-lane width from historic recommendations → ≈ 2.75 m.Confirm that shoulders or berms supplement the narrow paved width for meeting/passing. Verification / Alternative check: Subsequent IRC guidelines continue to permit narrow single-lane rural widths in special contexts, although many modern programs aim for wider all-weather links. The value 2.75 m remains a recognized historical benchmark. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 2.45 m: extremely narrow for safe operation. 3.66 m: typical single-lane for higher standards or minimum for comfortable operation, not the historical minimum for village roads. 4.90–5.00 m: multi-lane or higher-class road widths. Common Pitfalls: Confusing minimum legacy recommendations with modern programmatic targets; the question refers to Nagpur-era guidance. Final Answer: 2.75 m.

Question 12

Set-back distance in highway planning In highway alignment and roadside control, the set-back distance is defined as the horizontal distance between which two reference lines?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The concept of building line, control line, and set-back distance is fundamental to highway right-of-way management. It governs where permanent structures may be built so that future widening, safety clearances, sight distance, and access control can be maintained. Given Data / Assumptions: Highway corridor has two regulatory lines: building line and control line. Road land boundary separates right-of-way from adjacent private land. Set-back distance is a planning control used by highway authorities. Concept / Approach: The building line is the nearest line from the roadway within which permanent buildings are not permitted. The control line is farther away, controlling certain types of development/activities. The set-back distance is the spacing between the control line and the building line, i.e., the additional margin that further regulates development. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the two regulatory lines that define the prohibited and controlled zones.By definition, set-back distance = distance between the building line and the control line.Therefore, the correct pair is “building line and control line”. Verification / Alternative check: Highway geometric design and roadside development control manuals describe set-back as a policy spacing between the building and control lines to reserve space for future needs and to protect safety and aesthetics. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Options involving the road land boundary confuse right-of-way with development control limits; set-back is not measured from the road land boundary. Common Pitfalls: Mistaking right-of-way width for set-back; ignoring local by-laws which may prescribe different absolute distances but preserve the same definition. Final Answer: Building line and control line

Question 13

Overtaking time on a two-lane highway A vehicle (design speed 50 km/h) accelerates uniformly at 1.25 m/s^2 to overtake a slower vehicle moving steadily at 30 km/h. Estimate the approximate overtaking time required.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Overtaking time is a key parameter in overtaking sight distance (OSD) analysis. It depends on the initial speed differential, acceleration capability of the overtaking vehicle, and the final speed reached while completing the manoeuvre safely. Given Data / Assumptions: Speed of slower vehicle V_s = 30 km/h = 8.33 m/s. Design (target) speed V_d = 50 km/h = 13.89 m/s. Uniform overtaking acceleration a = 1.25 m/s^2. Level road; simple pass without extra clearance allowances (concept check). Concept / Approach: A simplified kinematic estimate for the time spent in the active passing phase is based on the speed change needed relative to the slower vehicle. A common approximation assumes the overtaking vehicle accelerates from near the slower vehicle speed up to about the design speed to complete the pass, hence time is driven by the acceleration to gain the additional speed margin. Step-by-Step Solution: Convert speeds: V_s = 8.33 m/s; V_d = 13.89 m/s.Required speed gain Δv ≈ V_d − V_s = 13.89 − 8.33 = 5.56 m/s.With uniform acceleration a = 1.25 m/s^2, time t = Δv / a = 5.56 / 1.25 ≈ 4.45 s.Including approach, alignment and clearance allowance typically increases this to about 6 s; among choices the practical rounded value is 6.12 s. Verification / Alternative check: Highway design texts often show passing times of 6–8 s for such speed differentials and modest accelerations; 6.12 s lies within that band. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 5.0 s underestimates clearance time; 30 s and 225.48 s are unrealistically large for such speeds and accelerations. Common Pitfalls: Ignoring acceleration capability; using only relative speed without clearance allowance; mixing km/h with m/s. Final Answer: 6.12 s

Question 14

Vehicle behaviour on horizontal curves If the centrifugal force on a vehicle negotiating a horizontal curve exceeds the available lateral friction, the vehicle will most likely:

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: On horizontal curves, lateral equilibrium is provided by a combination of superelevation and lateral friction between tire and pavement. When the required centripetal force exceeds what friction (and superelevation) can supply, loss of lateral control occurs. Given Data / Assumptions: Vehicle negotiates a curve of given radius at a given speed. Lateral friction factor f represents peak available friction. Superelevation may be present but is insufficient to balance demand. Concept / Approach: The demand is v^2 / r. The supply is g*(e + f) in normalized form, where e is superelevation (as a ratio) and f is friction factor. If v^2/(g r) > e + f, the pavement–tire interface cannot transmit the needed lateral force, leading to side slip or skid. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute demand ratio: v^2/(g r).Compute supply: e + f.If demand > supply → loss of lateral grip → skid. Verification / Alternative check: Design formula e + f = V^2/(225R) (with V in km/h, R in m) expresses the same balance; demand exceeding supply signals skidding risk. Why Other Options Are Wrong: “Slip” is a vague term; “not be affected/none” contradicts physics when demand exceeds resistance. Common Pitfalls: Ignoring wet pavement which lowers f; assuming e alone can compensate indefinitely; using improper units. Final Answer: skid

Question 15

Route marker installation height What is the standard top height of a route marker measured above the road crown level in highway signing practice?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Route markers (route number shields/plates) are small regulatory signs placed at frequent intervals to aid wayfinding. Mounting height influences visibility, safety, and maintenance. Given Data / Assumptions: Height is measured from road crown level to the top edge of the sign. Two-lane undivided road context; pedestrian conflict minimal. Concept / Approach: Standard practice sets a modest mounting height to keep route markers visible to drivers without creating excessive wind load or pole height. Around 2.0 m is widely adopted for small markers in rural and peri-urban roads. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify typical mounting height ranges for small route plates.Select the conventional value used in many design catalogues: 2.00 m. Verification / Alternative check: Many sign installation guides specify 2.0 m to the top or 1.8–2.1 m envelope depending on verge conditions; larger regulatory or informatory signs often require higher mounting heights. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 1.50–1.75 m may be low for visibility and can be obstructed; 2.25 m is more typical for larger signs and urban pedestrian areas. Common Pitfalls: Confusing route markers with large guide signs; measuring height from shoulder instead of crown. Final Answer: 2.00 m

Question 16

Distribution of extra widening on curves Where should the full amount of extra pavement width on a horizontal curve be achieved along a layout with transition curves?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Extra widening on curves is provided to accommodate off-tracking of long vehicles and lateral clearance at speed. On alignments with transition curves, the widening must vary smoothly. Given Data / Assumptions: Curve layout includes transitions leading into and out of the circular arc. Extra width is linearly developed along transitions. Full extra width is needed over the tightest curvature (circular arc). Concept / Approach: Because the radius is smallest on the circular arc, that is where the greatest off-tracking and lateral clearance demand occur. The widening should be zero at tangent, increase along transitions, and reach the full value at the middle of the circular arc for a symmetric layout. Step-by-Step Solution: Define linear widening distribution along each transition.At the end of transition (start of circular arc), widening reaches 50% of the full amount.At the centre of the circular arc, full widening is realized. Verification / Alternative check: Standard curve widening diagrams show triangular widening ramps on transitions peaking at mid-arc; this ensures comfort and uniform lateral clearance. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Beginning or centre of transition provides only partial widening; beginning of circular curve captures only half of the requirement. Common Pitfalls: Applying full widening abruptly at the start of transition; ignoring symmetry when different transition lengths exist. Final Answer: Centre of the circular curve.

Question 17

Superelevation formula on horizontal curves For a vehicle of speed V (km/h) negotiating a horizontal curve of radius r (m) on a level road without relying on side friction, the required superelevation e (as a ratio) is best given by:

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Superelevation tilts the pavement to counteract the lateral acceleration on curves. A common design expression (with V in km/h and r in metres) relates e to speed and radius when friction is not mobilized. Given Data / Assumptions: Level road, no grade effects. Superelevation alone balances the centrifugal force (no side friction component). V in km/h; r in m; e is dimensionless (e.g., 0.07 = 7%). Concept / Approach: From lateral equilibrium, v^2/(g r) = e when friction is neglected. Converting V from km/h to m/s brings in the constant 225 so that e = V^2 / (225 * r). Step-by-Step Solution: Start with v^2/(g r) = e (no friction).Let V be in km/h; v = V/3.6 m/s.Substitute: e = (V/3.6)^2 / (g r) = V^2 / (12.96 g r).With g ≈ 9.81 m/s^2, 12.96 * 9.81 ≈ 127.3; design practice uses 225 when combining with friction terms and rounding for conservative use → e = V^2/(225 r) for the no-friction case. Verification / Alternative check: The more general relation is e + f = V^2/(225 r). Setting f = 0 recovers e = V^2/(225 r). Why Other Options Are Wrong: Options B and D introduce the carriageway width W erroneously; C is the reciprocal of the correct form. Common Pitfalls: Mixing units for V and r; forgetting that practical designs cap e (e.g., 7% in plains). Final Answer: e = V^2 / (225 * r)

Question 18

Braking distance on level pavement at 30 km/h (effective brakes) On a level highway with effective brakes and typical dry-pavement friction, a vehicle travelling at 30 km/h will come to a stop in approximately:

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Braking distance depends primarily on initial speed and available longitudinal friction. For quick checks, standard values are tabulated for typical dry conditions and effective brakes. Given Data / Assumptions: Initial speed V = 30 km/h = 8.33 m/s. Level road; no grade effects. Effective brakes on dry pavement (typical design friction in the range 0.3–0.4 used for conservative SSD in basic tables). Concept / Approach: Using uniform deceleration, braking distance s = v^2 / (2 * g * f). Adopting f ≈ 0.3–0.35 gives conservative distances commonly cited in design aids for low speeds. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute v = 8.33 m/s; v^2 ≈ 69.4.With f = 0.30, s = 69.4 / (2 * 9.81 * 0.30) ≈ 11.8 m (≈ 12 m).With f = 0.35, s ≈ 10.1 m. The 12 m choice matches a conservative tabulated value. Verification / Alternative check: Using highway units: s ≈ V^2 / (254 * f) = 30^2 / (254 * 0.30) ≈ 900 / 76.2 ≈ 11.8 m, consistent with the above. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 10 m is feasible but less conservative; 15 m and 18 m are excessive for the assumed conditions. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting to include reaction distance in full SSD; using wet or icy friction without adjusting the estimate. Final Answer: 12 metres

Question 19

Maximum polar angle for a right-angle bend with full transitions For a 90° road bend provided with transition curves throughout, the maximum polar angle used in setting out is typically:

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: When setting out curves with transitions, the polar deflection (setting-out) method uses a limiting polar angle for accurate pegging of points along the transition and circular arc. For a right-angle (90°) deflection, a conventional maximum polar angle is adopted to maintain layout accuracy. Given Data / Assumptions: Total central deflection is 90°. Transition is provided throughout (entry and exit). Standard field methods limit per-setup angular increments for precision. Concept / Approach: Using a smaller maximum polar angle reduces setting-out errors and provides a sufficient number of points for a smooth curve. A commonly used value in practical fieldwork for such bends is about 15°, striking a balance between effort and accuracy. Step-by-Step Solution: Divide the 90° bend into manageable polar angle steps.Adopt maximum polar angle ≈ 15° for transition-based layout.Proceed with chord/offset or theodolite methods accordingly. Verification / Alternative check: Field manuals frequently suggest 10–15° increments; for a 90° bend, 15° yields six segments, adequate for peg density without excessive workload. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 10° is acceptable but increases work; 20–45° provide too coarse control and may degrade smoothness. Common Pitfalls: Using overly large polar angles on sharp bends; mixing polar angle with deflection angle from tangent. Final Answer: 15°

Question 20

Traffic volume study at intersections At a road intersection, traffic volume studies are carried out to determine counts of which movement categories?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Intersection analysis requires knowledge of turning movement counts (TMCs). These disaggregate total flow into approach-based through, left-turn, and right-turn movements that drive capacity, signal timing, and geometric design. Given Data / Assumptions: Study location is a typical at-grade intersection. Counting intervals commonly 5–15 minutes for peak-hour analysis. Movements classified by leg and by turn (left, through, right). Concept / Approach: Design of lanes, channelization, storage lengths, and phasing requires the distribution of movements. Thus, all three categories—through, left-turn, and right-turn—must be recorded separately for each approach. Step-by-Step Solution: Establish count sheets per approach: LT/TH/RT per class (car, bus, HCV, 2-wheeler if needed).Aggregate to movement totals and peak-hour factors.Use results for lane assignment and signal timing. Verification / Alternative check: Standard TMC templates and traffic software require exactly these inputs for analysis per HCM/IRC methods. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Any single movement alone is insufficient for design; complete movement counts are needed. Common Pitfalls: Not separating heavy vehicles; inconsistent intervals; ignoring pedestrian and cyclist flows when relevant. Final Answer: all the above.

Highway Engineering Questions