AASHTO Green Book 2001

[owillis28]

I came across a document containing helpful tabs to mark for the PE Exam. Since I don't use this reference in practice, I was wondering if someone has some helpful tabs for the 2001 edition?

They should be about the same (most of them are) but it doesn't hurt to make sure.

If you came across something and are willing to share, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks.

owillis

 

[morpheus]

Aren't we supposed to use the AASHTO Green Book 2004 ?

http://www.ncees.org/exams/professional/pe...n_standards.pdf

Matt

I came across a document containing helpful tabs to mark for the PE Exam. Since I don't use this reference in practice, I was wondering if someone has some helpful tabs for the 2001 edition?
They should be about the same (most of them are) but it doesn't hurt to make sure.

If you came across something and are willing to share, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks.

owillis

 

[owillis28]

Aren't we supposed to use the AASHTO Green Book 2004 ?

http://www.ncees.org/exams/professional/pe...n_standards.pdf

Matt

you are correct. We are supposed to use the 2004 edition. I am cheap to purchase a current edition.

owillis

 

[roadwreck]

Yes, the 2004 edition is what should be used for the exam. If you only have access to the 2001 edition though I'd go ahead and bring it. There aren't that many changes that I've seen between the two. One area that I have noticed a difference is between the SE design tables, the 2001 edition has more conservative values then the 2004 edition.

EDIT: Please note, the scans of the 2004 Green Book SE tables have been removed from this thread due to possible copyright infringements. I WILL NOT REPOST THEM, please do not PM me asking me to send them to you. If you want the information you will have to obtain the 2004 Green Book. I appreciate your understanding in this manner.

Thanks,

roadwreck

 

[Suns Den]

Here are the 2004 AASHTO Green Book SE tables. I'm not saying this is the only difference between the two editions, but I do know it is one of the more significant changes.

RW, Can you post a problem based on the tables.

 

[roadwreck]

RW, Can you post a problem based on the tables.

Determine the appropriate superelevation rate of an urban roadway with a design speed of 35mph and a degree of curvature of 8o01'28.63".

Answer:

Spoiler

3.4%

Hint:

Spoiler

On page 79-7 the CERM (10th edition) states that SE rates for urban roadways use maximum SE rates of approximatly 0.04 to 0.06. Most agencies use 0.04 for urban and 0.08 for rural unless extenuating circumstances apply. In other words, for this problem I used the e

max=4% table.

EDIT: Please note, the scans of the 2004 Green Book SE tables have been removed from this thread due to possible copyright infringements. I WILL NOT REPOST THEM, please do not PM me asking me to send them to you. If you want the information you will have to obtain the 2004 Green Book. I appreciate your understanding in this manner.

Thanks,

roadwreck

 

[Suns Den]

Determine the appropriate superelevation rate of an urban roadway with a design speed of 35mph and a degree of curvature of 8o01'28.63".
Answer:

3.4%

Hint:

On page 79-7 the CERM (10th edition) states that SE rates for urban roadways use maximum SE rates of approximatly 0.04 to 0.06. Most agencies use 0.04 for urban and 0.08 for rural unless extenuating circumstances apply. In other words, for this problem I used the e

max=4% table.

I am not exactly sure how to go about this and that was the reason I was looking for a practice problem.l

Here is my guess

R = 714 ft

looking at a emax of 6% and 8%, I get 4.8% and 6% respectively. (considering a design for urban roadway with max e of 6% which is met in both cases).

so what will be a right approach to solve problem like this in the exam. I mean why use 4% and not 6% or 8% emax when the design e% meets the required criteria (4-6%).

all said, what does the emax mean and the design e% from the tables for respective Radius.

BTW I like your blackout. (makes my lazy brain think a little more before I sneak up on the answer) :deadhorse:

 

[NCcarguy]

Just make sure the 2001 version has the SSD formulas set to an object height at 2', and not the old formula that used a 6" height....that made the vertical curves MUCh longer than they are today (or in the 2004 book) .

 

[Suns Den]

Just make sure the 2001 version has the SSD formulas set to an object height at 2', and not the old formula that used a 6" height....that made the vertical curves MUCh longer than they are today (or in the 2004 book) .

any tabbing info for AASHTO, HCM, Asphalt book, Conctete book and MUTCD..

 

[Suns Den]

I am not exactly sure how to go about this and that was the reason I was looking for a practice problem.l
Here is my guess

R = 714 ft

looking at a emax of 6% and 8%, I get 4.8% and 6% respectively. (considering a design for urban roadway with max e of 6% which is met in both cases).

so what will be a right approach to solve problem like this in the exam. I mean why use 4% and not 6% or 8% emax when the design e% meets the required criteria (4-6%).

all said, what does the emax mean and the design e% from the tables for respective Radius.

BTW I like your blackout. (makes my lazy brain think a little more before I sneak up on the answer) :deadhorse:

:brickwall:

 

[roadwreck]

:brickwall:

Opps, I've been a bit preoccupied so I haven't gotten back to this thread. Like I stated in my hint, most agencies will use the emax=4% table for urban sections and emax=8% for rural. Unless a problem states otherwise then I would use the 4% table to get my answer for this problem. I think the CERM states that for urban sections maximum SE should be between 4%-6%, that means you are to use the emax = 4% or emax=6% tables, not that your design SE for an urban section needs to be between 4% and 6%.

Using the provided information and the assumption that in an urban section you will use the emax=4% table, you can convert your degree of curve to a radius (which you did) to 714ft. Then go to the emax=4% table and for a speed design of 35mph you can see that the design SE for a 714' radius is 3.4%

EDIT: Please note, the scans of the 2004 Green Book SE tables have been removed from this thread due to possible copyright infringements. I WILL NOT REPOST THEM, please do not PM me asking me to send them to you. If you want the information you will have to obtain the 2004 Green Book. I appreciate your understanding in this manner.

Thanks,

roadwreck

 

[Suns Den]

Opps, I've been a bit preoccupied so I haven't gotten back to this thread. Like I stated in my hint, most agencies will use the emax=4% table for urban sections and emax=8% for rural. Unless a problem states otherwise then I would use the 4% table to get my answer for this problem. I think the CERM states that for urban sections maximum SE should be between 4%-6%, that means you are to use the emax = 4% or emax=6% tables, not that your design SE for an urban section needs to be between 4% and 6%. Using the provided information and the assumption that in an urban section you will use the emax=4% table, you can convert your degree of curve to a radius (which you did) to 714ft. Then go to the emax=4% table and for a speed design of 35mph you can see that the design SE for a 714' radius is 3.4%

Thanks! RW. That helps.

 

[eric08]

Here are the 2004 AASHTO Green Book SE tables. I'm not saying this is the only difference between the two editions, but I do know it is one of the more significant changes.

I am also using the 2001 version and would like the updated tables, but I don't see them to download them. Could you please repost them?

 

[eric08]

Uploaded again.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Mike in Gastonia]

Uploaded again.

I'm not a civil engineer, nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night; however, if I paid $120 for the most recent edition of a book and saw someone posting parts of it on the internet for others for free, I might be upset. And so might AASHTO...........

 

[roadwreck]

I'm not a civil engineer, nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night; however, if I paid $120 for the most recent edition of a book and saw someone posting parts of it on the internet for others for free, I might be upset. And so might AASHTO...........

I'd be upset if I shelled out the $120 to buy the book in 2001 and then 3 years later find that they released a new addition with a very limited number of changes.

I'm not posting the entire book here, just a couple of tables which I know changed from the 2001 edition to the 2004 edition. I'd be hard pressed to believe that AASHTO is going to be that upset about me posting a PDF of a few pages online which are really no use without the supporting backup information/formulas which accompany these tables in the 2004 green book (which remained unchanged from the 2001 edition). But I could be wrong.

I'll take it down though just to avoid any copyright infringement.

Edit: There are agencies that have not adopted the 2004 edition yet (believe it or not) so not everyone has a reason to go out and buy the 2004 edition, other then as a resource for the PE. For those that have a 2001 edition and are considering buying a 2004 edition soley for the exam I'd say you are better off spending that money elsewhere. The revisions I have seen are very minor.

EDIT: Please note, the scans of the 2004 Green Book SE tables have been removed from this thread due to possible copyright infringements. I WILL NOT REPOST THEM, please do not PM me asking me to send them to you. If you want the information you will have to obtain the 2004 Green Book. I appreciate your understanding in this manner.

Thanks,

roadwreck

 

[Mike in Gastonia]

I'll take it down though just to avoid any copyright infringement.

That was really my main point. You see how voracious NCEES is about protecting intellectual property. AASHTO could be the same way. I know for a fact that ASHRAE is.......

 

[sundriver]

can you repost the new tables in aashto 2004 please. I have the 2001 and would not want to pay $ 120 just for the table!

strictly for the PE!

Thanks

 

[roadwreck]

can you repost the new tables in aashto 2004 please. I have the 2001 and would not want to pay $ 120 just for the table!strictly for the PE!

Thanks

Sorry, as this thread progresses you will see that posting the tables from the 2004 edition led into a potential issue with copyright infringement. As such I will not be reposting those tables online. Sorry. I certainly understand not wanting to spend $120 just for a few small, although very important, revisions.

EDIT: Please note, the scans of the 2004 Green Book SE tables have been removed from this thread due to possible copyright infringements. I WILL NOT REPOST THEM, please do not PM me asking me to send them to you. If you want the information you will have to obtain the 2004 Green Book. I appreciate your understanding in this manner.

Thanks,

roadwreck

 

[Parks and Rec]

The Errata for the 2001 book is listed at the website below

<a href="http://ppi2pass.com/"the other board"/PPIInfo_pg_Errata-Errata.html" target="_blank">http://ppi2pass.com/"the other board"/PPIInfo_pg_Errata-Errata.html</a>

Is this what you are looking for?