Trucks and Buses

  Major Topics on this Page
  Truck Categories
  FHWA Vehicle Classification
  Truck Flows
  Notes on Buses

Based on typical ESAL equivalency factors and the fourth power law it is clear that heavy vehicles cause a majority of pavement structure damage (with the notable exception of studded tire wear).  Therefore, even though trucks make up a minority of motor vehicles (see Figure 1), they are a major consideration in pavement design.  This in-depth section briefly looks at the truck and bus population in the U.S. and some of their typical characteristics.

 

Figure 1: Truck and Bus Population in the U.S. (data taken from FHWA, 2000)

 

Truck Categories

Trucks can be divided up into any number of different categories or classes.  The most general truck classification is probably by gross weight.  For instance, a family sports utility vehicle or 3/4 ton pickup is drastically different than a delivery van or an interstate tractor-semi trailer.  Thus, one common practice is to classifying trucks and buses by gross vehicle weight rating.  The three most common categories are shown in Figure 2. 

Light
(pickup trucks, vans, SUVs)

Medium
(delivery trucks)

Heavy
(tractor-trailer combinations)

Figure 2: Common Truck Categories

Vehicle manufacturers use more precise technical definitions and divide trucks into eight classes according to gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR).  Table 1 shows vehicle manufacturer truck classifications.  Figure 3 shows a basic breakdown of the truck and bus population in the U.S. 

Table 1: Vehicle Manufacturer Truck Classification1

Category Class GVWR2 Representative Vehicles
Light 1 0 - 27 kN
0 - 6,000 lbs.
pickup trucks, ambulances,
parcel delivery
2 27 - 45 kN
(6,001 - 10,000 lbs.)
3 45 - 62 kN
(10,001 - 14,000 lbs.)
Medium 4 62 -  71 kN
(14,001 - 16,000 lbs.)
city cargo van, beverage delivery truck, wrecker, school bus
5 71 - 87 kN
(16,001 - 19,500 lbs.)
6 87 - 116 kN
(19,501 - 26,000 lbs.)
7
 
116 - 147 kN
(26,001 to 33,000 lbs.)
Heavy 8 147 kN and over
(33,000 lbs. and over)
truck tractor, concrete mixer, dump truck, fire truck, city transit bus

Notes:

  1. The above classes are not the same as used by the FHWA
  2. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR): weight specified by manufacturer as the maximum loaded weight (truck plus cargo) of a single vehicle.

 

Figure 3: Truck and Bus Population in the U.S. (from FHWA, 2000)

 

Looking at Figure 3, it is interesting to note that the trucks of primary consideration for pavement performance, the heavy trucks, only make up a small fraction of the U.S. truck population.   In essence, structural pavement design is usually concerned with no more than about 0.6% of the U.S. motor vehicle population (38.4% trucks, of which 2% are heavy trucks/buses).  However, these trucks make multiple trips and typically travel many more miles than the average passenger vehicle.  For example, a typical passenger vehicle may travel between 5,000 and 15,000 miles/year while a typical heavy truck may travel from 30,000 - 80,000 miles/year (USDOT, 2000).  

 

FHWA Vehicle Classification

The FHWA classifies vehicles in terms of their configuration rather than weight.  This type of classification system is more conducive to traffic applications but can be adapted for pavement loading applications.  It can also be easily confused with the vehicle manufacturers truck classification system shown in Table 1.  The FHWA Traffic Monitoring Guide (TMG) recommends classifying vehicles into 13 different categories.  All States currently use this classification scheme or some variation of it for classifying vehicles, although few use it exclusively (FHWA, 2001).  States typically aggregate the 13 FHWA categories listed in Table 2 into a small number of categories (about three to five) for ESAL forecasting and estimating.  Figures 4 through 9 show some FHWA vehicle class examples.

Table 2: FHWA Vehicle Classification (from FHWA, 2001)1

Class Type Description Typical ESALs per Vehicle2
1 Motorcycles

All two- or three-wheeled motorized vehicles. Typical vehicles in this category have saddle type seats and are steered by handle bars rather than wheels. This category includes motorcycles, motor scooters, mopeds, motor-powered bicycles, and three-wheel motorcycles. This vehicle type may be reported at the option of the State.

negligible
2 Passenger Cars

All sedans, coupes, and station wagons manufactured primarily for the purpose of carrying passengers and including those passenger cars pulling recreational or other light trailers.

negligible
3 Other Two-Axle,
Four-Tire Single Unit Vehicles

All two-axle, four tire, vehicles, other than passenger cars. Included in this classification are pickups, panels, vans, and other vehicles such as campers, motor homes, ambulances, hearses, and carryalls. Other two-axle, four-tire single unit vehicles pulling recreational or other light trailers are included in this classification.

negligible
4 Buses

All vehicles manufactured as traditional passenger-carrying buses with two axles and six tires or three or more axles. This category includes only traditional buses (including school buses) functioning as passenger-carrying vehicles. All two-axle, four-tire single unit vehicles. Modified buses should be considered to be a truck and be appropriately classified.

0.57
5 Two-Axle, Six-Tire, Single Unit Trucks

All vehicles on a single frame including trucks, camping and recreational vehicles, motor homes, etc., having two axles and dual rear wheels.

0.26
6 Three-Axle Single Unit Trucks

All vehicles on a single frame including trucks, camping and recreational vehicles, motor homes, etc., having three axles.

0.42
7 Four or More Axle Single Unit Trucks

All trucks on a single frame with four or more axles.

0.42
8 Four or Less Axle Single Trailer Trucks

All vehicles with four or less axles consisting of two units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit.

0.30
9 Five-Axle Single Trailer Trucks

All five-axle vehicles consisting of two units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit.

1.20
10 Six or More Axle Single Trailer Trucks

All vehicles with six or more axles consisting of two units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit.

0.93
11 Five or Less Axle Multi-Trailer Trucks

All vehicles with five or less axles consisting of three or more units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit.

0.82
12 Six-Axle Multi-Trailer Trucks

All six-axle vehicles consisting of three or more units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit.

1.06
13 Seven or More Axle Multi-Trailer Trucks

All vehicles with seven or more axles consisting of three or more units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit.

1.39


Note 1
: In reporting information on trucks the following criteria should used: 

  1. Truck tractor units traveling without a trailer will be considered single unit trucks.

  2. A truck tractor unit pulling other such units in a "saddle mount" configuration will be considered as one single unit truck and will be defined only by the axles on the pulling unit.

  3. Vehicles shall be defined by the number of axles in contact with the roadway. Therefore, "floating" axles are counted only when in the down position.

  4. The term "trailer" includes both semi- and full trailers.

Note 2: Based on the overall ESAL per vehicle class for 10 weigh-in-motion (WIM) sites averaged over a one-year period.  The averaging method treats all pavements the same (i.e., no separate LEFs for flexible and rigid pavements) and all axles as singles.  This approach produces LEFs similar to the 1993 AASHTO Guide's LEFs for single axles assuming SN = 5 and pt = 2.5.

 

Figure 4: FHWA Class 5 Figure 5: FHWA Class 8
   
Figure 6: FHWA Class 11 Figure 7: FHWA Class 10
   

Figure 8: FHWA Class 13

Figure 9: FHWA Class 4

 

WSDOT Vehicle Counting and ESAL Assumptions

WSDOT uses several different estimates for typical ESAL values. 

First, the WSDOT Pavement Management System (PMS) uses a simplified version of the FHWA vehicle classification system.  Like many other states WSDOT uses three categories and assumes the following ESAL values:

WSDOT Category FHWA Classes WSDOT Assumed ESALs per Truck
Single Units 4, 5, 6, 7 0.40
Double Units 8, 9, 10 1.00
Trains 11, 12, 13 1.75

The WSDOT PMS equation for annual ESALs on any given roadway is:

Annual ESALs = 365[0.40(single units) + 1.00(double units) + 1.75(trains)]

This equation implies that passenger automobile contributions to total ESAL counts are negligible.


Second, data collected between 1960 and 1983 provides a rough estimate of ESALs divided up into single units, combination units, buses and an overall truck factor.

Typical Flexible Pavement ESAL Factors Based on Measurement

Highway System ESAL Factors
Single
Units
Combination
Units
Buses Individual
Axle
Overall Trucks
(Excludes Buses)
Interstate 0.30 1.20 1.60 0.25 1.10
Non-Interstate Rural 0.50 1.40 1.60 0.25 1.40
Non-Interstate Urban 0.25 1.20 1.60 0.25 1.00
  • All panel trucks and pickups were excluded from the calculations if they had two axles with four tires (i.e., two axle, six tire trucks or larger were used).

  • The ESAL calculations are for flexible pavements (LEFs from Appendix D, 1993 AASHTO Guide, SN = 5, pt = 2.5) only.

  • Results are based on weight data from a limited number of weigh stations (typically 5 to 15) which operated for a maximum period of 24 hours for no more than five days per year. Thus, the samples and hence the summary may be biased (either high or low).

  • The above ESAL factors may appear to be "low"; however, about one-half of the trucks weighed at weigh stations were empty. Thus, an ESAL/axle factor = 0.25 corresponds to a single axle load of about 12,700 lb (56.5 kN) (assumes SN = 5, pt = 2.5).


Third, initial WSDOT weigh-in-motion (WIM) analysis reveals the following ESALs per vehicle:

WSDOT Category WIM ESALs/vehicle
Single Units 0.37
Double Units 1.02
Trains 1.22

Note that these assumptions agree rather well with WSDOT PMS assumptions for all vehicles except "trains".  For the 10 initial WSDOT WIM sites analyzed, the ESAL per vehicle for trains ranged from a low of 0.43 to a high of 1.79.

 

Truck Flows

In addition to the number and weight of trucks, pavement design is also concerned with where these trucks travel.  For instance, many residential streets only experience one or two heavy trucks per week (e.g., the garbage truck) while some of the busiest interstate truck routes can experience volumes of up to 500 trucks/hour (USDOT, 2000).  Figure 10 gives an idea of truck travel on National Highway System (NHS) routes.

Figure 10: Truck Flow on the National Highway System (from USDOT, 2000)
[Thickness of line is proportional to truck volume]

In their Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study (2000), the U.S. Department of Transportation made the following general observations on truck flow within the U.S.:

WSDOT Example Truck Traffic on SR 167 in Renton, WA

The following data gives some idea of the truck traffic on urban freeways in Western Washington.  Data for all three plots comes from the southbound WIM scale on SR 167 in Renton.

The first graphic shows average truck volumes (all classes) by day of week.  Weekend volumes are about 1/3 of weekday volumes, which means weekday only truck counts will overstate average annual truck loading rates.

The second graphic shows average daily volumes for combination trucks and single unit trucks by month from mid-1995 to early 2003. Seasonal variation and a steady growth in volumes can be seen. 

The third graphic shows the seasonal factor associated with each month for the same time period.  It illustrates that while the actual seasonal factor changes from year to year, the basic seasonal pattern is actually pretty consistent.


 

Notes on Buses

Although buses are sometimes ignored in truck counts, they can significantly contribute to overall pavement loading - especially in urban areas.  Many times, school buses provide the only major loading for residential pavements.  Furthermore, buses often inflict more pavement damage than much heavier trucks due to their axle configurations and wheel loads.   As shown in Table 3, a heavily loaded, dual powered bus (both diesel and electric power systems) can impart over 6 ESALs per bus.  Table 3 tabulates various bus LEFs for King County (WA) Metro. 

Table 3: Representative Bus ESALs (Metro, 1987; DeBoldt, 1993)

Bus

 

ESALs/Bus

 

Bus

 

ESALs/Bus

     AM General Diesel
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


1.14
1.67
2.34
2.85

 

     MAN 60'
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


0.84
1.42
2.20
2.87

     AM General Trolley
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


0.80
1.22
1.78
2.19

 

     Flexible Diesel
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


0.57
0.94
1.50
1.92

     Flyer
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


0.96
1.45
2.11
2.61

 

     GM Diesel
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


0.58
0.95
1.46
1.84

     Flyer Diesel
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


0.85
1.21
1.67
2.02

 

     Breda 60'
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


2.53
3.63
5.11
6.17

     MAN 40'
     Empty
     50% Full
     100% Full
     130% Full

 


1.27
1.80
2.67
3.29

 

 

 

 

Note: 130% Full is all seats filled with standing passengers

If no other information is known about a bus route other than the volume of buses, use an ESAL/bus corresponding to 50 percent full.  This results in an average ESAL/bus @ 1.60.

Table 4 shows the detailed King County Metro numbers used to calculate the values in Table 4.

Table 4: Seattle Metro Bus Data

  1. Reference: Metro, 1987

  2. Reference: DeBoldt, 1993

  3. Tire inflation pressures range from 95 to 115 psi

  4. Tire sizes may vary

Note: LEFs based on single axle, SN = 5, pt = 2.5