Advances in Transportation Geotechnics Ellis, Yu, McDowell, Dawson & Thom (eds) 2008 Taylor & Francis Group,

p, London, ISBN 978-0-415-47590-7

An assessment of the selected reinforcements of motorway pavement subgrade

D. Wanatowski
Nottingham Centre for Geomechanics, School of Civil Engineering, The University of Nottingham, UK

A. Florkiewicz & W. Grabowski

Institute of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, Poland

ABSTRACT: Thawing fine-grained soils are often saturated and have extremely low bearing capacity. In many countries with long-lasting winter seasons such weak soils may cause serious problems in the maintenance of road pavements. Consequently appropriate selection of the most efficient method of subgrade reinforcement is one of the most important factors in enhancing the performance and extending the service life of roads. In this paper, some of the most common methods, such as removal and replacement, cement stabilisation or the use of geotextile, used for reinforcement of motorway subgrade in Poland are analysed. Advantages and disadvantages of selected reinforcement examples with regard to environmental conditions are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

Thawing fine-grained soils are often fully saturated and have extremely low bearing capacity. In many countries with long-lasting winter seasons such weak soils may cause serious problems in the maintenance of road pavements. An appropriate selection of the most efficient method of subgrade reinforcement is therefore one of the most important factors in enhancing the performance and extending the service life of roads. This is particularly significant in the case of motorways, which are of the utmost importance to the development of any country. Owing, however, to systematic traffic of heavy vehicles and frost action in subgrade, motorway pavements can suffer serious structural damage during the spring thaw, and thus can last considerably less longer than expected. In order to protect motorway pavements from damaging frost action and increased moisture content during the spring thaw, the subgrade must have sufficient bearing capacity. For example, in Poland, according to the criteria of the General Directorate for Public Roads (GDDP 1997), a frost-susceptible motorway subgrade is required to have an elastic modulus E2 120 MPa and a relative compaction RC 103%. The elastic modulus E2 is determined by the plate-loading test and the relative compaction by the standard Proctor test. If these requirements are not fulfilled the subgrade has to be reinforced by one of the available methods,

e.g. removal and replacement, cement stabilisation or geosynthetic reinforcement. In this paper selected methods of reinforcement of a motorway pavement subgrade are compared. The advantages and disadvantages of each method are pointed out. Practical aspects of the real technical solutions used in Poland with regard to environmental conditions are also discussed. 2 SELECTED REINFORCEMENT METHODS

It is well known that different reinforcement aspects need to be considered for roads built on embankments and in cuttings. These two cases are illustrated schematically in Figure 1. It can be observed from Figure 1 that in the case of embankment constructed on a weak subgrade the reinforcement is normally located at its base (Fig. 1a) whereas in the case of cutting the reinforcing layer is located immediately below the pavement (Fig. 1b). In addition, the natural subgrade beneath embankment is normally modified by one of the deep improvement methods such as precompression, grouting, or in situ soil mixing (Fig. 1a). It should also be pointed out that the soil used as a fill in an embankment is generally remoulded, well compacted and has good drainage characteristics. On the other hand, the soil beneath a pavement of the

553

Figure 3. Transformation used for the pavement without geotextile reinforcement. Figure 1. Reinforcement of a weak subgrade: (a) embankment; (b) cutting (modified after Florkiewicz & Grabowski 1999).

SUBGRADE

Figure 2. Flexible pavement structure considered in the study.

road in cutting is normally in its natural undisturbed state. Furthermore, the road in cutting often requires a more complex drainage system compared with the road on embankment. These two situations will therefore normally require separate consideration (Brown 1996, Florkiewicz & Grabowski 1999). In this study, a flexible motorway pavement constructed in a 1 m deep cutting is considered. A standard pavement structure selected from the Polish catalogue (GDDP 1997) is analysed. The pavement consists of three asphalt concrete layers and has a total thickness of 36 cm, as shown schematically in Figure 2. According to the Polish requirement (GDDP 1997), such motorway pavement requires a foundation with an elastic modulus E2 120 MPa and a relative compaction RC 103%. It is obvious that such parameters cannot normally be obtained for fine-grained soil subgrade so, in order to meet the required parameters, five different reinforcement techniques were used: a) b) c) d) e) Removal and replacement of the weak soil, Geotextile-reinforced well-graded gravel, Mechanically-stabilised crushed aggregate, Geogrid-reinforced crushed aggregate, Cement stabilisation.

A very soft sandy clay (symbol CL, according to the Unified Soil Classification System) in a plastic state was chosen as an example of a weak, frost-susceptible subgrade. The clay has the liquidity index IL = 0.50, the undrained shear strength cu = 37 kPa, the California Bearing Ratio, CBR = 1.6%. The assumed elastic modulus E0 = 10 CBR = 16 MPa. The groundwater table at the depth of 1 m from the bottom of the pavement structure and the depth of frost penetration hz = 0.90 m were assumed. According to the Polish standard (GDDP 1997), this situation is considered to be a bad groundwater condition. As a result, the total thickness of the pavement structure, including the reinforcing layer, must be at least 0.85hz , which in this case equals 0.76 m.

DESIGN METHODOLOGY

Three different methods were used to design the required thickness of reinforcing layers. In all three methods the same design criterion was used, that is, to obtain E2 120 MPa at the top of the reinforcement. As mentioned earlier, according to the Polish requirement (GDDP 1997) this condition must be fulfilled for all motorway pavements. All conventional solutions (i.e. without geotextile reinforcement), such as removal and replacement, mechanically-stabilised aggregate and cement stabilisation, were designed by the use of a method of equivalent modulus based on the elasticity theory (Yoder & Witczak 1975). The principle of this method is to transform a multi-layer elastic system into an equivalent two-layer system to which Burmisters equations (Burmister 1943) can be applied (Fig. 3). In the equivalent model, the pavement material is assumed to be homogeneous, isotropic and elastic, and is characterised by

554

Figure 4. Transformation used for the geotextile reinforced pavement.

Poisons ratio, , and the equivalent elastic modulus, Ee , which can be obtained from the following equation:

Figure 5. Design curves for reinforcement of aggregate layers using Tensar geogrids (modified after Golos 2005). Table 1. layers. Summary of the materials used in reinforcing

where hi and Ei are the thickness and the elastic modulus of single layer, respectively. The subgrade soil is also assumed to be homogeneous, isotropic and elastic and is characterised by Poissons ratio, 0 , and the elastic modulus, E0 , as shown in Figure 3. A geotextile reinforcement of the weak subgrade was designed by the modified method of equivalent modulus described by Wojtowicz (1994) and Bugajski & Grabowski (1999). This method is based on the assumption that the elastic properties of the geotextile-reinforced pavement will not be lower than those of the conventionally-reinforced pavement (i.e. without geotextiles). The principle of this method is similar to that of the previous method, i.e. to transform a multi-layer elastic system into the equivalent two-layer system. The modified method, however, also accounts for the tensile properties of the geotextiles, in terms of the tensile modulus, K, as shown schematically in Figure 4. A geogrid reinforcement of the subgrade was designed with Tensar geogrids characterised by a high tensile stiffness. A method developed at the University of Hannover in Germany (Golos 2005) was adopted. This method is based on Boussinesqs theory and fullscale experiments carried out by Kennepohl et al. (1985). The method accounts for the interlock created by Tensar geogrids and the compacted aggregate and is presented as a set of design curves for different values of the equivalent elastic modulus (Ee ) required at the top of the reinforcement. In this study, the curves for the Ee = 120 MPa were used (Fig. 5). All the materials used in the design of reinforcing layers are summarised in Table 1 (Rolla 1987). A circular tyre imprint with the diameter D = 0.313 m and

Material Asphalt concrete 0/20 mm Asphalt concrete 0/25 mm Asphalt concrete 0/31.5 mm Cement-stabilised soil Crushed-stone aggregate Well-graded gravel

Elastic modulus E (MPa) 1500 1500 1500 600 400 200

Symbol in Fig. 6

a contact pressure p = 0.65 MPa were assumed in all the calculations. This corresponds to a 50 kN single wheel load (100 kN single axle load).

5 ASSESSMENT 5.1 Proposed reinforcement solutions

All the proposed reinforcements of the weak subgrade are presented in Figure 6. In addition to the materials summarised in Table 1, the following geosynthetics were considered in the design:

A woven geotextile with a minimum tensile strength of 45 kN/m (Fig. 6b), Tensar SS30 geogrid with the tensile strength of 30 kN/m (Fig. 6d) An unwoven geomat acting as a separation layer at the interphase of the subgrade and the reinforcement (Figs 6a, c, d, e).

555

Figure 7. Total surface deflections.

made of crushed aggregate or cement-stabilised soil of CBR 40%.

5.2 Total surface deflection It is well known that most of the total surface deflection is caused by the elastic compression of the subgrade layer (Yoder & Witczak 1975). Furthermore, deflections are simply the mathematical integration of the vertical strain with depth. It can, therefore, be assumed that the same factors that affect vertical strains in the subgrade also affect the surface deflection. As a result, the values of total surface deflection were used in this study to assess the effectiveness of the proposed reinforcement solutions. Deflection values were calculated by use of the solution of the two-layer system proposed by Burmister (1943). In this paper, it is assumed that the surface layer represents all the pavement layers and is characterised by the equivalent modulus, Ee . The underlying layer represents the natural subgrade and is characterised by the elastic modulus, E0 (Fig. 3). Total surface deflection, T , for the two-layer system was calculated by means of equation:
Figure 6. Proposed reinforcement solutions for the subgrade with CBR = 1.6% (all dimensions in cm): (a) removal and replacement; (b) geotexile reinforced well-graded gravel; (c) mechanically-stabilised crushed-stone aggregate; (d) geogrid-reinforced crushed-rock aggregate; (e) cement-stabilised soil.

Figure 6 shows that in addition to the reinforcing layer required by the soft subgrade, a capping layer of 15 cm was provided for all the structures. According to the Polish requirement (GDDP 1997) such a capping layer is required for all the roads that carry large volumes of heavy traffic in order to provide a working platform for heavy machinery during construction of the pavement layers. The Polish standard (GDDP 1997) specifies that the capping layer shall be at least 10 cm thick. The capping layer should be

where p = contact pressure; a = radius of tire imprint; E0 = elastic modulus of the subgrade; F2 = dimensionless factor depending on the ratios of Ee /E0 and h/a. The total surface deflections calculated for each reinforcement method are compared in Figure 7. It should be noted that letters on the horizontal axis correspond to the solutions shown in Figure 6. It can be observed from Figure 7 that the calculated values of total surface deflection are in the range of 0.580.70 with the lowest obtained for the removal and replacement method and the highest for geogridreinforced crushed-stone aggregate. Figure 7 also shows that the geotextile reinforcement of well-graded

556

gravel causes a slight reduction in the deflection compared with the well-graded gravel without geotextile. On the other hand, the use of Tensar geogrid together with crushed aggregate reduces the pavement deflection significantly when compared with the layer of crushed aggregate without any geogrid.This is because the interlock mechanism between the granular material and the geotextile can only be created when the geogrid reinforcement is provided. When a typical woven geotextile is used, the mechanism of interlock cannot be created. It can also be observed from Figure 7 that the deflection obtained for the cement stabilisation is much lower than that for the conventional removal and replacement method even though the thickness of the former layer is much smaller than that of the latter. This suggests that a greater reduction in the deflection will be obtained by increasing the modulus or rigidity of the reinforcing layer rather than by increasing its thickness. 5.3 Shear stresses in the subgrade

Figure 8. Maximum shear stresses in the subgrade.

The preceding section showed that different values of the total surface deflection will be obtained for different reinforcement solutions. It was demonstrated that the pavement deflection could be reduced by incorporation of more rigid reinforcing layers and/or increasing their thickness. As the pavement layers, however, become stiffer and provide increased load spreading capability, shear stresses within the pavement and the subgrade will change. Therefore, it is important to verify whether the shear stresses developed in the subgrade do not exceed the shear strength of the subgrade soil. Similarly to the total surface defections, the shear stresses in the natural subgrade were calculated by use of Burmisters theory. The maximum shear stress in the subgrade, max , was calculated under the edge of the tyre. The value of max was determined from nomographs based on the ratios Ee /E0 and h/D, and the shear strength of the subgrade soil (Rolla 1987). The maximum shear stresses in the subgrade obtained for each reinforcement are compared in Figure 8. Although all the maximum shear stresses shown in Figure 8 are smaller than the undrained shear strength of the subgrade soil, cu = 37 kPa, differences between the values of max obtained for each reinforcement are noticeable. The highest shear stress of 24.0 kPa was obtained for the removal and replacement, whereas the lowest shear stress of 16.6 kPa was obtained for the cement stabilisation. It can also be observed from Figure 8 that an increase in the reinforcement stiffness causes a reduction in the shear stress in the subgrade. In other words, the effect of stiff reinforcing layers such as crushed aggregate with geogrid or the cement-stabilised soil is pronounced. Similar observations have also been made

for two stiffer subgrade soils with CBR of 2.5% and 3.9%. The differences between shear stresses in the subgrade obtained for different reinforcements were, however, much smaller (Wanatowski & Florkiewicz 2000). From the values of total surface deflection and shear stresses developed in the subgrade it can be concluded that the design of geogrid reinforcement or cement stabilisation can guarantee the highest bearing capacity of the subgrade. The reinforcement with the use of geotextile or mechanically-stabilised aggregate can provide a good bearing capacity. Finally, the replacement of the soft soil with well-graded gravel provides a satisfactory bearing capacity of the subgrade.

5.4 Drainage As mentioned earlier, the capping layer of 15 cm was provided for all proposed motorway pavement structures. According to the Polish standard (GDDP 1997), a crushed aggregate or cement-stabilised soil with CBR 40% can be used for such layers. In order to improve long-term drainage in the pavement, however, the material used for the capping must also have a sufficient permeability. Therefore, it is proposed that an aggregate with the coefficient of permeability k 0.01 m/s rather than a cement-stabilised soil should be used for the capping layer in all the proposed solutions. In addition, the capping layer should be connected to a deep drainage system in the form of drains installed under the ditches. Such a drainage system will provide an excellent way of removing all troublesome water from the pavement structure. An example of the motorway drainage system used in the case of removal and replacement of soft soil is shown in Figure 9. It should be noted that although the capping layer provides an excellent drainage of the pavement, none of the proposed reinforcements can fully protect the natural subgrade from surface water that can infiltrate through cracks in the pavement or at the pavement edges. Nevertheless implementation of a deep

557

Figure 9. Example of deep drainage system of motorway pavement (modified after Florkiewicz & Grabowski 1999).

drainage system should provide a very efficient protection of the soft subgrade from further plasticising. 5.5 Frost resistance

Figure 10. Normalised costs of the proposed reinforcements.

It can be seen from Figure 6 that the total thickness of each pavement structure is greater than the required value of 0.85hz = 0.76 m. Therefore, all the proposed structures meets the design criterion with respect to the frost resistance (GDDP 1997). The motorway pavement reinforced with the use of Tensar geogrid and cement stabilisation have the smallest thicknesses of 0.95 and 0.94 m, respectively (Figs 6d, e). These values are very close to the depth of frost penetration hz = 0.90 m. Therefore, it is possible that in the case of a severe winter, the two above-mentioned pavements may still be subjected to damaging frost action. The total thickness of the other three structures is noticeably larger (Figs 6a, b, c), which guarantees a very good frost resistance of the motorway pavement. 5.6 Construction costs Adequate analysis of the selected reinforcement methods must include consideration of their construction costs. In this study, a simplified economic analysis was carried out. A normalised cost index (NCI) defined by Equation 4 was used in the assessment.

aggregate. This is because reinforcement of the aggregate layer with Tensar geogrid allows the overall construction depth to be reduced, saving on materials and excavation. Similar conclusions have also been drawn for the subgrade with CBR of 2.5% and 3.9%. The differences between construction costs of different reinforcements were, however, smaller (Wanatowski 1999). 6 CONCLUSIONS

For the sake of simplicity it was assumed that all necessary materials are available within 15 km of the construction site. It should also be noted that maintenance costs were not considered in the analysis. The normalised costs of the proposed reinforcement are summarised in Figure 10. It can be observed from Figure 10 that highest construction cost was obtained for the conventional removal and replacement method. On the other hand, the lowest cost was calculated for the layer of well-graded gravel reinforced with geotextile. Figure 10 also shows that the layer of Tensar geogrid-reinforced aggregate is more cost-effective compared with the layer of mechanically-stabilised

Rapid development of modern technologies and application of new materials in highway engineering make it possible to solve even very complicated reinforcement problems by a variety of methods. It can be noticed that geotextiles play a significant part in most of the modern reinforcement techniques. This is because they have proved to be among the most versatile and cost-effective ground modification materials. Selected reinforcement methods of the subgrade presented in this paper show that the mode of operation of a geotextile in such applications is defined by three functions: separation, reinforcement and drainage. Depending on the application, the geotextile can perform two or more of these functions simultaneously, e.g. a woven geotextile used for the reinforcement of the layer of well-graded gravel (Fig. 6b) performs both reinforcement and separation functions. The simplified assessment of the selected reinforcement techniques has shown that all solutions possess both advantages and disadvantages. For instance, the conventional removal and replacement method can provide a very good frost protection of the subgrade but it may be relatively expensive. On the other hand, the layer of well-graded gravel reinforced with geotextile can be very cost-effective but it does not provide the most efficient reinforcement for the natural subgrade. In the authors opinion, successful reinforcement of a weak subgrade of motorway pavement requires a complex geotechnical analysis which should be

558

included in motorway design reports. Such analysis should consider the combined effect of technical and economical aspects of the proposed solutions and the actual environmental conditions on the durability and reliability of motorway pavement. REFERENCES
Brown, S.F. 1996. Soil mechanics in pavement engineering. Gotechnique 64(3): 383426. Bugajski, M. & Grabowski, W. 1999. Geosynthetics in highway engineering. Poznan University of Technology, Poznan (in Polish). Burmister, D.M. 1943. The theory of stresses and displacements in layered systems and applications to the design of airport runways. Proceedings of Highway Research Board, 23: 126148. Florkiewicz, A. & Grabowski, W. 1999. Stabilisation and drainage of the motorway pavement subgrade. Drogownictwo 54(12): 381385 (in Polish). GDDP, 1997. Katalog typowych konstrukcji nawierzchni podatnych i polsztywnych. Instytut Badawczy Drg i Mostw, Warszawa, Poland (in Polish).

Golos, M. 2005. Methods of design of bases made of aggregate reinforced with geogrid on weak soil. Drogownictwo 60(78): 222228 (in Polish). Kennepohl, G., Kamel, N., Walls, J. & Haas, R. 1985. Geogrid reinforcement of flexible pavements: design basis and field trials. Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists 54: 4570. Rolla, S. 1987. Projektowanie nawierzchni. WKiL, Warsaw (in Polish). Wanatowski, D. 1999. Technical and economical analysis of the selected methods of reinforcement and drainage of motorway subgrade. M.Sc. Thesis, Poznan University of Technology, Poland (in Polish). Wanatowski, D. & Florkiewicz, A. 2000. Influence of different improvements of the subgrade on its bearing capacity. Drogownictwo 55(11): 323327 (in Polish). Wojtowicz, J. 1994. Granular road bases reinforced by the non-woven geotextile. Part 1. Theoretical solution. Drogownictwo 49(10): 332337 (in Polish). Yoder, E.J. & Witczak, M.W. 1975. Principles of pavement design. Wiley & Sons, New York.

559