EFFECT OF GEOGRID REINFORCEMENT IN MODEL TRACK

TESTS ON PAVEMENTS

By Fereidoon Moghaddas-Nejad 1 and John C. Smale

(Reviewed by the Highway Division)

ABSTRACT: An experimental program was carried out to investigate the influence that a geogrid has as rein-
forcement fo~ the g~~ular base layer of a flexible pavement constructed on sand. Tests were performed using
a m~del testmg f~clhty that. allowed r~peated passes of a tire across a section of pavement that was either
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 11/26/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

unremforced or remforced with a geognd. Measurements were taken of the surface deformations and of internal
movements in the pavement and subgrade, and these were used as a means of assessing any improvement in
pavemen~ performance due to the inclusion of the geogrid. Two different mechanisms that reduced the permanent
deformatIOn of the pavement (rutting) were recognized. They were a significant reduction in the deformation of
t~e ~ase. layer due mainly to the confinement and interlocking of the base material, and the improved load
dlstnbutlOn on the subgrade layer that causes a reduction of subgrade deformation. Both single- and multiple-
track tests were performed. It was found that in both cases, for a thin base layer, the least surface deformation
was obtained with the geogrid at the center of the base layer.

INTRODUCTION geogrid as a reinforcement in a pavement is comparable to

For pavements constructed on compressible soils, the inclu-
sion of geotextiles or geogrids can lead to less deformation of
the pavement and can reduce the thicknesses of base materials
needed. In many cases, this can be cost effective, as the sav-
ings in importing base material and in repairs to the pavement
can offset the cost of the reinforcement.
Giroud et al. (1984) presented an early design method for
geogrid-reinforced unpaved roads. In their paper it was stated
that even for unpaved roads where large displacement is ac-
ceptable (say, 0.075 m or 0.15 m), only a 10% reduction in
thickness of a pavement (from its unreinforced thickness) can
be made due to the membrane effect of the geogrid. Their
calculations also showed that approximately half of the thick-
ness reduction resulting from geogrid reinforcement is due to
subgrade confinement (in the case of clay subgrade) and ap-
proximately half of the improvement is from improved load
distribution resulting from interlocking of the geogrid and the
base layer material.
Miura et al. (1990) investigated the mechanism by which a
geogrid could suppress nonuniform settlement of a pavement
constructed on a soft clay subgrade. They showed in prelim-
inary experimental tests that the mechanism by which a rein-
forced pavement base improved performance was mainly the
interlocking effect rather than the membrane tension effect.
They placed the geogrid in a slightly convex shape. After ap-
plying vertical load to the surface of the model pavement,
compressive strains were developed in every part of the geo-
grid, yet the grid still worked as a reinforcement even though
it was not in tension. This showed that the contribution to
reinforcement could only have been due to interlocking. To
develop the membrane effect of a grid it was recommended
that the geogrid be placed in a concave shape. Miura et al.
(1990) also mentioned that the long-term effect of a one-layer
that of base material about 10 cm thick.
Chan et al. (1989) conducted large-scale experiments in or-
der to investigate the aggregate base reinforcement potential
of geogrids and geotextiles in surface pavements. Their ex-
perimental tests included multiple- and single-track tests. Their
results indicated that the inclusion of a geogrid, despite its
lower stiffness, resulted in better performance than that of a
geotextile, because geotextiles required a much higher defor-
mation, which is not desirable in paved roads, in order to pro-
duce the same effect as the geogrid. This showed that strength-
ening was due to restraint or some local reinforcement effect
rather than a membrane effect. Their investigation showed,
however, that a geotextile performs better than a geogrid as a
separator between the subgrade and base, Reduction in defor-
mation of the subgrade was evident when a geofabric was
placed directly on top of the subgrade, particularly when it
was prerutted. Prerutting of a geogrid might result in increas-
ing its membrane effect. The investigation of Chan et al.
(1989) also indicated that overall resilient behavior of the
pavement was not significantly influenced by a geosynthetic.
They recommended prerutting to improve resistance to per-
manent deformation and to lessen surface rutting; however,
they did not recommend it for weak granular materials.
Hass et al. (1988) indicated that for low deformation sys-
tems interlock and confining action is required, while for high
deformation systems, a tension membrane action is more ef-
fective. They also concluded that, for better performance, a
geogrid should be placed at the base-subgrade interface of thin
base sections and near the midpoint of thicker base layers. For
optimum grid reinforcement they proposed placing the grid in
a zone of moderate elastic tensile strain (i.e., 0.05%-0.2%)
beneath the load center, and stated that maximum permanent
strain in the grid during its design life should not exceed
I %-2% depending on the rut depth failure criteria.

IRes. Student, School of Civ. and Mining Engrg., The Univ. of Sydney,
NSW 2006, Australia.
2 Assoc. Prof., School of Civ. and Mining Engrg., The Univ. of Sydney,
NSW 2006, Australia.
Note. Discussion open until May I, 1997. To extend the closing date
one month. a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of
Journals. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and
possible publication on November 3, 1995. This paper is part of the
Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 122, No.6, Novemberl
December, 1996. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-947X196/0006-0468-0474/$4.00
+ $.50 per page. Paper No. 11952.
4681 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 1 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1996
TEST FACILITY
The current series of tests on geogrid reinforced pavements
was carried out using a model test facility (Wong and Small
1994), which is described briefly in this section.
The facility consists of a laboratory scale driven wheel that
is guided around an oval-shaped track by an overhead guided-
rail system, as shown in Fig. I. The wheel is driven by an
electric motor that is powered through a conductor rail system.
During each revolution around the track, the wheel passes over

J. Transp. Eng. 1996.122:468-474.

 the test section of pavement once and triggers a microswitch
that causes a computer to record data. Data may also be trans-
mitted from the moving carriage back to the computer.
The use of an oval-shaped track overcomes many of the
limitations of both linear and circular tracks, as it does not
occupy a large space and does not involve complex reciprocal
action (Brown and Brodrick 1981).
Recently the facility was modified in order to change the
position of the wheel across the pavement in random sequence.
To make this possible a hydraulic jack was added to the system
with a transducer that had been set up within the jack to mea-
sure the displacement of the ram. A control program was de-
veloped in order to generate random numbers between 0 and
I. The random number is then converted to a target voltage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 11/26/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
There is a linear relation between the voltage and movement
of the jack ram that is determined by calibration. By this
means, the computer can determine the position of the wheel
across the pavement randomly. A predetermined statistical dis-
tribution of the wheel is given as input to the program. For
each pass of the wheel across the test section of pavement, the
position of the wheel is recorded by the computer and is com-
pared with the maximum number of passes allowed at that
specific position. Should the total number of passes reach the
maximum allowable, then the program ignores that random
number and creates the next number. Once the maximum num-
ber of passes is reached at each wheel position, the program
stops the test. As was mentioned earlier, after each revolution
the total number of passes at each position and their distri-
bution across the pavement are recorded and updated in the
computer.
In addition to its oval shape, the advantage of this system
in comparison with other systems is that in those facilities the
total number of passes at each position must reach the maxi-
L~ ~_~ ,
'Il:st tank
FIG. 1. Plan of Overhead Track (Dimensions in mm)
(A) Driven Wheel
(B) Rotating Arm
(e) Lower Timing Belt
(D) Upper Timing Belt
(B) Upper Set of Pulleys
(F) Overhead track
(G) Upper & Lower Bogies
(H) Worm Gear Box
(I) Electric Motor
(1) Spring Loading System
FIG. 2. Side Elevation of Loading Carriage
JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1996/469
J. Transp. Eng. 1996.122:468-474.
mum predetermined number for that position before the next
random position is determined. However, in the Sydney, Aus-
tralia pavement facility, after each revolution the position of
the wheel across the pavement is again determined randomly,
which is closer to reality, and simulation of deformation in the
pavement is more reliable. The other advantage of this system
is that the spacing of the positions along which the wheel
tracks can be changed easily from one test to another.
Test Tank
The test tank used in the tests consist of two hollow steel
boxes, 1.4 m by 0.5 m by 0.4 m deep internally with the upper
and lower boxes bolted together at the flanges. With this ar-
rangement, it is possible to use the lower box for preparing a
clay layer and to have different soil material in the upper box.
Loading Carriage
Two bogies, a loading system, a driven pneumatic tire, and
the driven unit form the loading carriage (Fig. 2). The tire has
a diameter of 230 mm, which is about one-quarter of the size
of a full-scale truck tire. The contact area of the tire at a pres-
sure of 210 kPa (30 psi) is 24.5 cm 2 • To provide stability in
the longitudinal direction (so that no rocking occurs), each of
the bogies has a pair of axles. There are roller bearings at the
top where the rotating arm that carries the wheel is pivoted.
The location of the pneumatic tire is at the opposite end of
the horizontal portion of the rotating arm to the pivot. Located
approximately midway between the pivot and the axle of the
wheel is a spring-loading system that models the suspension
of full-scale vehicles.
A linear voltage displacement transducer (LVDT) is fitted
between two reaction plates to monitor the variation of com-
pression in the spring. To transmit data from the LVDT back
to the computer through a data rail, an analog-to-digital signal
converter is used.
Materials
Wearing Course
The wearing course is constructed from a proprietary cold-
mix bituminous material (Pavefix), which consists of 5 mm
maximum size aggregate and a special bitumen binder. The
aggregate size was chosen to be about one-quarter of the size
of aggregates used in prototype pavements.
Road Base
According to the scale of the laboratory model, a fine ag-
gregate was used for the base material. Material used for the
base layer was a crushed aggregate of basaltic origin consist-
ing of mainly subangular particles of 5 mm nominal size.
The D IO and D 60 sizes shown in Fig. 3 are approximately
2.0 mm and 4.0 mm, respectively, giving a uniformity coef-
ficient of 2.0; therefore, the road base can be classified as a
uniform fine gravel with less than I % of particles finer than
75 !Lm. The minimum and maximum densities for the road-
base material were 1,380 kg/m 3 and 1,490 kg/m 3 , respectively.
Sand Subgrade
A silica sand, commonly known as Sydney sand, was used
to make up the subgrade. As can be seen from the grading
curve (Fig. 3), this material has a D IO of about 0.25 mm, a D60
of about 0.37 mm, and a uniformity coefficient of about 2. It
can, therefore, be classified as a well-graded sand with less
than I % fines. The minimum density was 1,440 kg/m3, while
the average maximum density was 1,690 kg/m 3 •
 Legend
~ 8
~ ........ ~ ~ ~ ~
ASTM SIEVE SIZES
~ ~ <'I
-00\0 '''It
. ~~ :
, ..... ..... ~
X } 5mm ~ Silica
}
+ aggregates e Sand
~~~ ....8<'1
r-- <'I
II"l ~lQ
B.S. SIEVE SIZES
oo"to ~oo:~:
---t"'-:-~
~:
. ..... ,.... M
100
IJ
90 I'"
Il
80
] 70
..... I
j
"
II
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 11/26/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

@60 I
II
~ 50 J
40
30
j
20 f
1/
10 7
~ ~
o
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Equivalent particle size (mm)
..
Cia
Stone or
Boulder
FIG. 3. Particle Size Distributions

TABLE 1. Geogrld Properties rials was to use manual compaction. Filling and compaction
Longitudinal Transverse
were carried out in seven sections in any single layer of soil
Property
(1 ) (2) (3) that was added to ensure uniformity.
Grid opening size 40mm 28mm
0.9 mm thick X 3 mm 1.2 mm thick X 3 mm
Wearing Course
Grid web size
wide wide Several methods had already been tried for compacting the
Loads at 2% strain 7.0 kN/m 12.0 kN/m
bitumen wearing course to avoid disturbance of the granular
Loads at 5% strain 14.0 kN/m 23.0 kN/m
Approximate peak strain 12.0% 10% layers (Wong et al. 1994). The method finally chosen was to
Mass/area 0.3 kg/m2 compact a layer of uniform thickness on a flat piece of board
Polymer composition Polypropylene with a series of fishing lines running underneath the bitumi-
nous material so that the pavement could be lifted by the fish-
ing lines and laid down onto the road base. The bitumen was
Geogrid Reinforcement then compacted with a flat compaction tool, so as to form a
good contact between the wearing course and the base mate-
The geogrid used for tests was a biaxially oriented polymer rial. This method enabled a uniform thickness of pavement to
grid (Tensar SS2). Although the geogrid reinforcement used be successfully placed on top of the road base with very little
in the tests was not scaled down, it was a product that had a cracking evident. Therefore, the same method was used in this
relatively small opening size and a small web size. Although
study.
at prototype scale, the grid would not correspond exactly to
commercially available grids; it would correspond to rein- MEASUREMENT OF DEFORMATION
forcement with a larger grid size and a higher stiffness. The
properties of the grid used in the tests are presented in Subsoil Deformation
Table 1.
The subsurface deformation was measured by transducers
(7Y LYDTs). The resolution of the data-acquisition system
Compaction Method was found to be about 0.003 Y, which approximately corre-
sponded to 0.01 mm of displacement. The subsurface defor-
Granular Material mation setup included a perspex disk with a thin steel wire
hung through its center, with the bottom end of the wire con-
Because the degree of compaction is dominant in determin- nected to the core of a transducer. This is shown in Fig. 4(a).
ing the deformation characteristics of granular materials, pre-
paring uniform layers with similar density and particle struc- Surface Deformation
tures is desirable. Furthermore, reproducible test results should
be obtained, and therefore close control of the compaction pro- Drawing pins pushed into the surface were used for mea-
cess needs to be exercised. suring surface displacements in a line perpendicular to the path
Considering the previous requirements, it was decided that of the wheel. At the centerline of the wearing course, trans-
the most suitable method for compacting the pavement mate- ducers were used instead of the drawing pins.
470 I JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING I NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1996

J. Transp. Eng. 1996.122:468-474.

 kept between 200 e and 25°e, and the wheel speed was set so
that the tire made 5,000 passes in 22.75 h (i.e., an average
speed of 2.67 kmJh).

Single-Track Tests

SUbgrade
The first set of experiments was carried out by allowing the
tire to track along a single path (i.e., without randomly moving
the wheel from side to side). Figs. 5(a-c) show, respectively,
the permanent deformation in the pavement at various levels
for the unreinforced section, for the case where the geogrid is
at the bottom of the base, and where the geogrid is at the
middle of the base layer.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 11/26/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The results clearly illustrate that the geogrid significantly

decreases permanent deformation (rutting). For the test carried
FIG. 4(a). Geogrld and Instrument Layout (Tests 51 and M1)
out with a geogrid at the center of the base layer and at the
bottom of the base layer, the deformations generated at the

-
surface of the pavement after 5,000 load repetitions are 70%
and 40% smaller than those for the unreinforced section, re-
spectively. A comparison of the surface deformations of the

Single nack Test

Base-8ubgrade interface
SUbgrade I
'j
'"
-8 -15

1hmsducer
l
;> -20

-25
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
FIG. 4(b). Geogrld and Instrument Layout (Tests 52 and M2) Number of passes

FIG. 5(a). Permanent Deformation (Unrelnforced 5ectlon-

The drawing pins were pushed into the wearing course to Test 51)
act as a reference target. To provide sufficient area to bear
onto the pavement, the head of each pin (as well as the disk 5r-----------,----..., Single nack lest
of the transducer system) was made about 11 mm in diameter,
which was small compared with the contact width of roughly
45 mm of the test wheel. Hence, the deformations measured
were considered representative of those on the centerline of
the pavement. Wearin COurse-base interface
Vertical surface deformation was measured with a digital
depth micrometer, for which the smallest graduation was 0.01
mm. To take a measurement, a crossbar was placed perpen-
dicularly to the path of the wheel and the depth to the target
was measured relative to the crossbar.
-15 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
TEST RESULTS Number of passes

All tests were performed at approximately one-quarter scale. FIG. S(b). Permanent Deformation (Geogrld at Base-5ubgrade
The thicknesses of the wearing course, base layer, and Interface-Test 51)
subgrade in all tests were 20 mm, 40 mm, and 2,000 mm,
respectively, corresponding to thicknesses of 80 mm, 160 mm, Single 'lrack lest
and 8,000 mm in the field. The tire pressure used in the tests
was 210 kPa (30 psi).
Both single (8) and multiple (M) track tests were carried
j Base-8ubgrade interface
out. In the single track tests, the tire was always tracked along
the same path, while for the multiple track tests the tire was
moved laterally before each pass over the test section, as ex-
j
~
Wearing course· base interface

-4
plained previously.
Each test was carried out on two test sections. The first was
~ -5
~
a control section that was unreinforced and the second had a -6
geogrid at the bottom of the base layer (test 81 and test Ml), -7
while the second test included a section with a geogrid at the 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
bottom and a section with the geogrid at the middle of the Number of passes
base [test 82 and test M2] see Figs. 4(a) and 4(b). FIG. S(c). Permanent Deformation (Geogrld at Middle of
In each of the tests, the temperature in the test facility was Base-Test 52)

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1996/471

J. Transp. Eng. 1996.122:468-474.

 Single Thlck 'lest layer. The plots show that there is lower deformation for the
OeD 'd al middle ofb... case where the geogrid is at the base-subgrade interface, and
I this effect will be explained later.

j
-8 -15
Multitrack Tests
As stated previously, in multiple track tests the wheel was

J -20
allowed to traverse in random sequence across the pavement
to nine different specified positions. The distribution of the
number of passes was determined from that experienced in the
-25 field (Claessen et al. 1977). The spacing between each track
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
position was 25 mm and the distribution of the number of
Number of passes
passes of the wheel across the pavement is illustrated in
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 11/26/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 6(a). Permanent Deformation of the Surface (Rutting) Fig. 9.

(Tests S1 and S2) A comparison of the surface deformation of the pavement
15
with the number of passes of the wheel is shown in Fig. 10.
Single track lest
10 O,5,...------------r--I------,
.... Data from left of centerline Single lhIck lest
I 5

0 0
o 6 Data from right of centerline

,~ ,
j -5 I

-8 -10
. ,
I I8 -0.5

l ~
-15

-20
Oeogrid al base-subarode
interface
"

"'
•
\ .;~ Unreinforced '.;:l

~ -I
.E
-25
-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 ~
-1.5
Distance from centerline (mm)

FIG. 6(b). Permanent Deformation across Surface (Tests S1

and S2) (Pass Number 3500) -2
0 50 100
0,...----------------,
-1 k ...:=r.::':::.d.::al.::;IDI::::'dd!:::::.;eo:::,f,:::bas::e=-_ _
Oeo
Distance from center (mm)

FIG. 8. Permanent Deformation of Subgrade (Tests S1 and S2)

-2 (Pass Number 3500)
-3
-4 interface
-5
-6
-7
-8

-9 Single '1hIck 11:st

-10 OL....-.;.~1~000,."..--2~000~-~3OOO~--4000~~"""':'5OOO:':":'-~6000~
Number of passes

FIG. 7. Permanent Deformation within Base (Tests S1 and S2)

pavement for the two reinforced sections and the unreinforced

section is shown in Figs. 6(a) and 6(b). Fig. 6(a) shows the
surface deformation at the centerline of the pavement, while
Fig. 6(b) shows the deformations across the surface of the
FIG. 9. Number of Passes at Each Wheel Position
pavement at right angles to the direction of track of the wheel.
These clearly show the superior performance with the geogrid
at the center of the base layer. 5,...-----""'1"'""-----------,
I
Multiple track test
Fig. 7 shows deformation within the base layer (which is
defined as the vertical compression of the base layer under the ,....,01------------------1
center of the wheel load). During the first few passes, the ~ Geogrid at the middle
';;' ~ / ';-iihe' base layer Geogrid at the base-subgnde
effect of the geogrid has been mobilized and reduced defor- ,g 5 ~.:~ inlerface (11:s1-M~
mation within the base occurs. This is most pronounced for
the geogrid at the middle of the base layer.
The plot suggests that the main mechanism of the reinforce-
J- . . . . -\·~;~:~~SUb~;;;-·-·-·-·-.
-8 -10 ••••. mterface (11:sl-M2)
'"
ment is interlocking with the granular material and confine- ~ '"
j:l p'" Unreinforced section
ment of the base material preventing lateral displacement of ~-15 .
the base layer, which accumulates with an increasing number
of passes. As can be seen, the geogrid at the middle of the
base has been more effective, dramatically reducing defor- -20 0~-~I~OOO~-~2~OOO~---::3-:':OOO:-:-----:'4000:':':---:-:!5000.
mation in the base layer as compared to the unreinforced base.
Number of passes
Fig. 8 shows the deformation of the subgrade, which is es-
sentially the vertical movement at the top of the subgrade FIG. 10. Permanent Deformation of Surface (Tests M1 and M2)

472/ JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1996

J. Transp. Eng. 1996.122:468-474.

 when the geogrid is at the center of the layer, there is less
Multiple track test Unn:info.-l section deformation within the base layer than when it is at the base-
10 subgrade interface; however, as mentioned earlier, this seems
Geogrid at the base-subgrade
interface (1Ost-MIl to have had little effect on surface deformations.
5
-'-', \ Fig. 13 shows deformation of the interface between the base
and the subgrade along a section at right angles to the direction
o 1----~r_--+__-_fF_----_i of travel of the wheel. Once again, it can be seen that the
.~
~ -5 Geogrid at middle of
the base layer
.,,,
~~~~. Geogrid at the b.....subgrade
geogrid has reduced deformations at the interface, probably
because the geogrid-reinforced base tends to spread the ver-
~ i interf""e (1Os1-M2) tical load, resulting in a lower vertical stress.
~ -10 The accuracy with which the test can be repeated can be
~ seen in Figs. 10-13, where results are presented for the re-
-IS inforcing layer placed at the base-subgrade interface for tests
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 11/26/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

-20 L-_--I_ _-.l._ _ ~ _ _....l__ _...__ __' M 1 and M2. The measured deformations can be seen to be
-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 very close. Single-track tests were also repeated several times
Distance from the centerline (mm) to confirm that the test results did not vary substantially.
As is clear from Fig. 11, the vertical deformation bowls
FIG. 11. Permanent Deformation of Surface (Tests M1 and M2)
(Pass Number 4108) beneath the reinforced sections are wider and shallower than
those of the unreinforced section, which indicates an improved
distribution of normal stress at subgrade level due to the pres-
Multiple track test ence of the geogrid. It cannot be due to a tensioned membrane
ot=:=======----~=:r;;;tJ;;_;;;:;r.rr.;;T~ effect of the geogrid because, as can be seen from Fig. 13, the

I -I
Geogrid at the base-subgrade
maximum deformation of the geogrid is not more than about
2 mm (which is probably not enough to mobilize the
membrane effect and cause a reduction of 5 rom in vertical
.g interface (1est-M2)
deformation of the subgrade). Furthermore, as Fig. 10 shows,
~'" -3 Geogrid at the base-subgrade during the first few passes where deformation is not large there
interface (1est-MI)
~ is a significant difference in deformation between the rein-
forced and unreinforced sections, indicating that the reduction
~ -5 of normal stress is not due to a membrane effect. The effect
~ Ureinforced section of the grid is to prevent lateral expansion of the base material
-6
and to spread the vertical stress onto the subgrade; this causes
-7 OL----1O...... ......---3000~--~4000~---::'!5000
00---2000 a reduction in surface deformation.
The other result of interest that may be seen from Fig. 13
Number of passes
is that vertical deformation of the subgrade with the geogrid
FIG. 12. Deformation within Base (Tests M1 and M2) at the base-subgrade interface is smaller than that with the
geogrid at the middle of the base. This effect can also be seen
3 ......- --- -. , . - -......- - - - - - - - . . . , in Fig. 8 for the single-track test. This suggests that the con-
Multiple track test
2 fining effect of the geogrid at the base-subgrade interface is
reducing vertical strains in the vicinity of the reinforcement.
1
IS -1
0 ~""">O>';'~ •• ------,lc....---~!fC----i
.....;:--
\ < .
In carrying any tensile strains that tend to develop at the bot-
tom of the base layer, the reinforcement makes the base layer
';;1 •
act as a "slab", thus spreading the load onto the subgrade.
§ -2 \ ./ CONCLUSIONS
.B -3 /'. /
~ \ i
11 -4 ~nr:~~fOrced "' The following conclusions can be drawn from the test re-
'f -5 / Geogrid at base-subgrade sults:
~ -6 Geogrid at middle of
\ •\.
/ interface (1est-MI)

-7
the base layer •
.......
-8 L- ......
-200 -100
Distance from the centerline (mm)
FIG. 13. Permanent Deformation of Base-Subgrade Interface
(Tests M1 and M2) (Pass Number 4108)
In this case, there is once again a marked improvement in the
surface deformation for the reinforced sections, although the
position of the reinforcement did not seem to have had as
much effect as it did in the single track tests. Fig. 11 shows
the deformation across the surface of the pavement at right
angles to the direction of the wheel track after 4,108 passes
of the wheel. These results show that the effect of the geogrid
is to reduce the surface deformations by about 50%, as com-
pared to an unreinforced section,
Fig. 12 shows the deformation within the base layer (which
is defined as the vertical compression of the base layer under
the center of the wheel load). As for the single track tests,
./ 1. Where a pavement is trafficked along a single path or
...L- ....._ _---' rut, a geogrid can significantly decrease the permanent
0 100 200
deformation of the pavement. For the materials tested, a
decrease in vertical deformation of 40% was observed in
the case where the geogrid was at the bottom of the base
layer, and a decrease of 70% was observed with the geo-
grid at the middle of the base. However, in nonchan-
nelized-traffic tests, reduction in permanent deformation
was of the order of 50%, which was about the same for
tests done with reinforcement at the middle or at the
bottom of the base layer.
2. Two different mechanisms associated with the geogrid
reinforcement were recognized, including
• Interlocking with the base layer aggregate and reduc-
tion of the permanent lateral displacement of the gran-
ular material
• Improvement in load distribution on the subgrade layer
due to the "slab" effect of the base layer and geogrid
3. In both multiple- and single-track tests, placing the geo-
grid at the middle of the base layer was most effective
JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1996 /473

J. Transp. Eng. 1996.122:468-474.

 in reducing pavement settlement (although in the multi-
ple track tests this was marginal) due to interlocking and
lateral movement reduction of the base material in the
region of the reinforcement. This effect may be depen-
dent on pavement thickness, however, and probably de-
pends on the depth of the stress bulb produced beneath
the tire. Further tests would have to be carried out to
confirm this.
APPENDIX. REFERENCES
Brown, S. F., and Brodrick, B. V. (1981). "Nottingham pavement test
facility." Transp. Res. Rec. 810, Transportation Research Board, Wash-
ington, D.C., 67 -72.
Chan, F., Barksdale, R. D., and Brown, S. F. (1989). "Aggregate base
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 11/26/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
reinforcement of surfaced pavements." Geotextiles and Geomembra-
nes, 8,165-189.
474/ JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1996
J. Transp. Eng. 1996.122:468-474.
Claessen, A. I. M., Edwards, J. M., Sommer, P., and Uge, P. (1977).
"Asphalt pavement design-the Shell method." Proc., Int. Conf on
Struct. Design of Asphalt Pavements, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Mich., 39-73.
Giroud, J. P., Ah-Line, C., and Bonaparte, R. (1984). "Design of unpaved
roads and trafficked areas with geogrids." Proc., Symp. Polymer Grid
Reinforcement, Science and Engineering Research Council and Netlon
Ltd., London, 116-127.
Hass, R., Walls, J., and Carroll, R. G. (1988). "Geogrid reinforcement
of granular bases in flexible pavements." Transp. Res. Rec. /l88,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 19-27.
Miura, N., Sakai, A., and Taesiri, Y. (1990). "Polymer grid reinforced
pavement on soft clay grounds." Geotextiles and geomembranes, 9,
99-123.
Wong, H., and Small, J. C. (1994). "Effect of orientation of approach
slabs on pavement deformation." J. Transp. Engrg., ASCE, 120(4),
590-602.