Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 306

Comparison of Inverted Pavements with Different Types of Crack Relief Layers

Rajan Singh Baghel1; Sridhar Kasu Reddy2; and Anush K. Chandrappa3

1
Post-Graduate Student, School of Infrastructure, IIT Bhubaneswar. Email: rsb15@iitbbs.ac.in
2
Research Scholar, Dept. of Civil Engineering, IIT Kharagpur. Email:
kasusridhar.iitkgp@gmail.com
3
Assistant Professor, School of Infrastructure, IIT Bhubaneswar. Email: akc@iitbbs.ac.in
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ABSTRACT

Inverted pavements with stiff base are one of the engineered solutions to reduce the thickness
of the pavement structure in relation to a conventional pavement. In this study, 3D finite element
models of inverted pavements with different crack relief layers (aggregate interlayer and SAMI)
and a steady static linear analysis were carried by loading with dual wheel and wide base tire
assembly. The wide base tires resulted in higher strains in the asphalt layer compared to dual
wheels. However, the rutting strain on the subgrade was lower due to the wide base tire assembly.
The asphalt layer showed higher tensile strain on the pavement with aggregate interlayer, while it
is in pure compression in pavement with the SAMI layer. Overall, the study indicated that SAMI
as a crack relief layer is viable option than the aggregate interlayer in terms of long-term
performance considering the issues associated with material availability and constructability.

Keywords: Aggregate interlayer, Dual wheel assembly, Inverted pavements, Stress absorbing
membrane interlayer, Wide base tires.

1. INTRODUCTION

In general, the pavement layers are arranged such that the stiffness of the layer decreases as
we go down along with the depth. This is due to the fact that the upper layers are subjected to
direct loading from the vehicles and requires to be stiffer than the lower layers. However, such
pavement composition becomes exorbitantly thick when designed for heavy traffic haul. In order
to address this issue, inverted pavement composition was conceptualized, where a stiff base layer
is provided below a bituminous layer with a crack relief layer in between them. The stiff base layer
is generally a cement treat base (CTB), which undergoes cracks due to shrinkage. Direct placement
of asphalt layer above CTB will cause cracks to reflect upwards into the asphalt layer resulting in
structural failure. In order to curtail the reflection of cracks from CTB, crack relief layers in the
form of unbound aggregate interlayer (AIL) or stress absorbing membrane interlayer (SAMI) is
provided between CTB and asphalt layer. The presence of AIL not only prevents reflection of
cracks but also adds on to the structural capacity of the pavement, unlike SAMI. As a general
convention, the pavements with AIL are referred to as inverted base pavements and pavements
with SAMI are referred to as composite pavements (Flintsch et al, 2008; Cortes Avellaneda, 2010).
Although both of them come under the class of composite pavement, the provision of different
crack relief layers between CTB and asphalt layer results in different pavement behavior.
Additionally, the fatigue life of CTB is considered to be one of the primary design parameters.
Tutumluer and Barksdale (1995) investigated two instrumented inverted base pavement sections
with different CTB layer materials. The results indicated that inverted base pavement showed

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 307

lower vertical stresses in the subgrade and the performance was found to be better than
conventional pavement. A non-linear elastoplastic model was used to model the unbound
aggregate layer in an inverted base pavement by Cortes et al (2012). The study found that non-
linear stress-dependent behavior in theAIL was much pronounced in the inverted base pavement
due to the presence of stiffer CTB below it. The tensile stresses in the CTB and asphalt layer are
reduced as the modulus of the unbound aggregate layer is increased. The study also showed that
the subgrade layer was subjected to lower vertical stresses in inverted base pavements compared
to conventional flexible pavement composition. The numerical simulation of inverted base
pavements with thin asphalt layers was conducted by Papadopoulos and Santamarina (2015). A
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

non-linear constitutive relation was used to AIL to capture the stress-dependent behavior. As the
thickness of the AIL is increased, the tensile stress in the CTB is reduced while it is increased in
the asphalt layer. Owing to the anisotropic behavior of AIL, the vertical stiffness just below the
wheel load was higher and it decreased away from the load. The study recommended that the
thickness of the asphalt layer should be between 25-50 mm to endure higher design life. The field
studies of the in-service modulus of AIL were undertaken by Terrel et al (2003) with the
application of wave propagation techniques. The field measurement indicated that the modulus of
AIL varied in the range of 180 MPa to 660 MPa, with higher values corresponding to higher loads.

Figure 1. Research Outline

Unlike AIL which performs as a structural layer and also a crack relief layer, SAMI is used
only as a crack relief layer in inverted or composite pavements. Ogundipe et al (2014) conducted
a numerical study by modeling wheel track tests to study the behavior of pavement with and
without SAMI. It was found that the introduction of SAMI resulted in higher deflection compared
to the model without SAMI. Nonetheless, the strains predicted in the overlay with SAMI were less
than those without SAMI indicating better reflection crack propagation resistance. A full-scale
accelerated test was conducted by Ogundipe et al (2013 a and b) to study the effect of SAMI
thickness. It was found that the section with 5 mm SAMI thick showed almost 4.5 times higher
life than the control section, while the section with 10 mm thick SAMI which showed 2.26 times
higher life than the control section. It has to be noted that most of the studies have performed finite
element modeling on the inverted pavement without due consideration for the crack in the CTB

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 308

layer. Further, there are no significant studies that have compared the behavior of inverted
pavement with SAMI and AIL are crack relief measures. Moreover, inverted pavement with
SAMI or with AIL may show different behavior or responses, when subjected to loading from
conventional dual wheel configuration and wide base tire configuration. As wide base tire trucks
offer superior performance abilities compared to dual-wheel tires, soon or later it may replace
conventional dual wheel configuration and hence it is necessary to understand and quantify its
effect on pavements (Al-Qadi and Wang, 2009).
The main objective of the research study is to develop a 3D finite element model of composite
pavements with different crack relief measures and study the behavior when subjected to loading
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

of conventional dual wheel and wide base tire assembly. The research outline is shown in Figure
1.
2. METHODOLOGY AND MODELING OF PAVEMENT
The 3D finite element model (FEM) of the pavement was developed in Abaqus. Each model
was of size 1.9 m by 1.9 m, which represented a half section of a typical lane of a road. The 3D
FE model with AIL consisted of the asphalt layer, AIL, CTB, Cement treated subbase (CTSB),
and subgrade, while the model with SAMI consisted of the asphalt layer, SAMI, CTB, CTSB, and
subgrade. Each layer in the model was assumed to be linear elastic with modulus and Poisson’s
ratio as the design inputs. The modulus and Poisson’s ratio of each layer considered in the study
are shown in Table 1. The wheel path for the dual wheel assembly was modeled by taking the
measurement of the tire from a typical dual-wheel assembled dumper truck, whose end-to-end
width was 295 mm, while the width of contact was 225 mm and contact length was taken as 235
mm. The gap between the dual wheels was measured to be 100 mm. In the case of the wide base
tires, the tire considered was 455/55R22.5. The tire footprint area for the wide base tire was taken
from the study conducted by Maozai et al, 2011, which had a contact width of 385 mm and a
contact length of 227 mm. However, for modeling purpose, the contact width was taken as 385
mm but the contact length was changed to 235 mm. The pavement was modeled with a gap of 10
mm in the CTB layer, which represented the crack, and since cracks in CTB does not have any
load transfer function, it was considered as a void space (Pais and Pereira, 2000). The meshing
was done such that finer mesh was provided in the region of the wheel path, while the mesh size
gradually increased away from the wheel path. The continuum 3D 8-noded reduced integration
elements (C3D8R) were used for computation as the reduced integration results in lower
computing resources without compromising the results. Each layer in the model with AIL was
assumed to be fully bonded, while in the model with SAMI, tie constraint was given between the
interface of asphalt layer-SAMI to reduce the computational time. The model with dual wheel and
wide base tire assembly was subjected to a contact pressure of 1.02 MPa in order to consider the
effect of overloading. The load was placed at a distance of 0.4 m from one of the pavement edges
and above the cracked portion of CTB. The boundary conditions included fixing the bottom of the
model in all directions, while the sides of the model were made free to deflect vertically. Four
pavement sections were developed in this methodology whose thicknesses are shown in Table 2.
As shown in Table 2, the model with the SAMI layer has a higher thickness of CTB compared to
the model with the AIL. The higher thickness of CTB in the SAMI model was obtained using
Odemark’s principle where the equivalent thicknesses of 100 mm AIL plus 200 mm CTB were
found to be 245 mm of CTB. This was done to maintain the thickness of the asphalt layer the same
across all the models. The thickness of the SAMI layer was adopted from Ogundipe et al (2013a).
The 3D FE models with AIL and SAMI are shown in Figure 2.

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 309

Table 1. Material Inputs for the Pavement Model

Layer Modulus, MPa Poisson’s Ratio Reference

Asphalt Layer 3000 0.35
AIL 450 0.35
IRC:37-2018
CTB 5000 0.25
CTSB 600 0.25
Subgrade 68 0.35
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

SAMI 635 0.35 Ogundipe et al (2013b)

Table 2. Thickness of Each Layer (in mm)

Inverted Pavement with AIL Inverted Pavement with SAMI

Layer
AILDT* AILSS* SAMIDT* SAMISS*
Asphalt Layer 60 60 60 60
AIL 100 100 - -
SAMI - - 10 10
CTB 200 200 245 245
CTSB 200 200 200 200
Subgrade 500 500 500 500
*Refer section 3

The AILDT model was validated using IITPave – flexible pavement design software, which is
based on IRC:37. The Table 3 shows the comparison of strains at various layers of AILDT.

Table 3. Validation of the Model

IIT
Parameter Thickness, mm AILDT
Pave
Tensile strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer,
60 180.3 180.305
microns
Compressive strain at top of the aggregate interlayer,
100 -1422 -1411
microns
Compressive strain at the top of subgrade, microns - -498.3 -566.8

3. RESULTS AND ANALYSES

The stresses and strains were recorded by creating a path along with the global maxima, which
was indicated by the contours. The following representation is used in preparing the plots:
AILDT – Pavement model with aggregate interlayer subjected to dual tire loading
AILSS – Pavement model with aggregate interlayer subjected to wide base tire loading
SAMIDT – Pavement model with aggregate interlayer subjected to dual tire loading
SAMISS – Pavement model with aggregate interlayer subjected to wide base tire loading

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 310
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 2. General Assembly of Models Used in this Study

3.1. Asphalt Layer

The strains at the surface, along with the depth, and bottom of the asphalt layer for AILDT and
AILSS are shown in Figure 3. It can be seen that the transverse strain at the top of the asphalt layer
has both compressive and tensile strains. In the dual wheel assembly, a large tensile strain is found
between the wheels, which is of order 125 microns. However, in the case of wide-base tires, this
component is absent, indicating that wide-base tires tend to cause lower top-down cracking.
Further, the longitudinal strain at the top was found to be purely compressive in nature, where
wide base tires depicted higher compressive strain indicating a tendency to cause surface rutting.
However, Al-Qadi and Wang (2009) found that the wide base tires caused lower compressive
strains at the top compared to the dual-wheel assembly for conventional flexible pavement. This
one way indicates that a stiffer asphalt layer at the surface will be required for the pavement
subjected to significant traffic from wide-base tires. Further, the transverse strain at the bottom of
the asphalt layer was a combination of tensile and compressive strain. The portion of asphalt below
wheel load was in tension, which is in the order of 180 microns. In the case of wide-base tires,
transverse tensile strain at the bottom was around 120 microns. The longitudinal strain at the
bottom was in pure tensile nature in both wide base and dual tire assemblies. The wide base tire
depicted higher longitudinal tensile strain which was around 240 microns in comparison to dual-
wheel assembly, which caused a strain of 190 microns. In summary, the wide base tires cause
higher longitudinal strains but lower transverse strains in the top and bottom portion of the asphalt
layer, respectively and this observation was in line with Al-Qadi and Wang (2009). Figure 4 shows
the strain profile in the asphalt layer in the pavement model with SAMI. In the case of transverse
strain, the profile is similar to that of the pavement model with AIL. However, in the case of the
longitudinal strain, the asphalt layer depicted compressive strain in both top and bottom surfaces.
The maximum principal stresses also depicted compressive stress at the top and bottom portion of

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 311

the asphalt layer. This indicates that the development of tensile strain at the bottom of the asphalt
layer is completely eliminated when the SAMI interlayer is used.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 3. Strain Profile in the Asphalt Layer in AILDT and AILSS

Figure 4. Strain Profile in the Asphalt Layer in SAMIDT and SAMISS

3.2. Aggregate Interlayer (AIL)

The max principal stress at AIL is shown in Figure 5 for AILDT and AILSS. It can be seen
that both the top and bottom portion are in compression, which is a definitive behavior of an
inverted pavement with AIL. The compressive stresses in both the top and bottom portion increase
the modulus of the layer upon application of load. The wide base tire assembly rendered relatively
higher compressive stresses than dual wheel assembly. The higher compressive stress is seen in
the bottom of AIL because of the stiff CTB layer, which provides a confining effect to the AIL
(Cortes et al, 2012). In contrast, if we consider max principal stresses in the asphalt layer, the top
portion was compressive while the bottom was in tension.

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 312
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 5. Maximum Principal Stress in AIL

Figure 6. Tensile Strains in CTB Layer in Pavement Model with Aggregate Interlayer

Figure 7. Tensile Strains in CTB Layer in Pavement Model with SAMI

3.3. Cement Treated Base

The tensile strains at the bottom of the CTB layer are shown in Figure 6. It can be seen that
transverse tensile strain is higher than longitudinal tensile strain irrespective of loading assembly.
Further, tensile strain due to a wide base tire was higher than dual wheel assembly. Figure 7 shows
the tensile strain in the CTB layer with the SAMI interlayer model. Akin to AIL models, the
pavement with wide base tire loading depicted higher transverse tensile strain compared to the
dual wheel assembly. Interestingly, the region around the crack tip (Top surface) showed tensile
strain at the top in the longitudinal direction in both cases of wheel loading assembly due to the
concentration of stresses. This indicates that when groove cut is made in CTB or lean concrete

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 313

layer to prevent shrinkage cracks (George, 2001), adopting the skew cutting method will reduce
the localized failure in the cement stabilized layer. As no load transfer devices are used in cement
stabilized layer, construction-wise, skew cut should not be a problem.

3.4. Subgrade
The vertical compressive strain on the top of the subgrade for AIL and SAMI models is shown
in Figure 8 and 9, respectively. Although permanent deformation (rutting) in subgrade may not be
a predominant failure mode for inverted pavements, it can be seen that a wide base tire causes
lower vertical compressive strain compared to the conventional dual tire assembly. This can be
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

due to the fact that AIL had developed larger compressive stresses under wide base tire loading
that increased the modulus of AIL and thus lower strain in the subgrade. In contrast, Al-Qadi and
Wang, 2009 found that subgrade compressive strains were higher in the case of wide-base tires
compared to the dual-wheel assembly for the case of conventional flexible pavement composition.

Figure 8. Vertical Compressive Strain at the Top of Subgrade with AIL models

Figure 9. Vertical Compressive Strain at the Top of Subgrade with SAMI models

3.5. SAMI
The SAMI layer showed a large deformation in the range of 0.30 – 0.35 mm. This characteristic
of the SAMI layer reduces the tensile strain and dissipates the energy by undergoing large
deformations. As the model studied had already crack in it, the SAMI layer penetrated inside the
crack thus preventing transferring the tensile strain from CTB to the asphalt layer. The maximum
principal stress indicated that the layer was in compression both in top and bottom, which can be
attributed to the large deformation (Button and Lytton, 1987).

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 314

4. THE BEHAVIOUR OF AIL AND SAMI MODELS

The previous section showed the stress and strain profiles in the pavement model with
aggregate interlayer and SAMI as crack relief layers. Figures 3 and 4 show that the asphalt layer
is subjected to higher tensile strain in the model with the AIL compared to the SAMI model. The
longitudinal tensile strain in the bottom of the asphalt layer of the AIL model was found to be in
the order of 200 microns unlike the SAMI model, where the asphalt layer was in compression.
This indicates higher life can be expected in the asphalt layer with SAMI as a crack relief layer
due to the absence of tensile strain. Further, although much significant differences were not found
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

in tensile strain in CTB due to AIL and SAMI as interlayer, the pavement with AIL depicted
slightly higher tensile strains in CTB. In the subgrade layer, a marginal difference in vertical
compressive strain was found in the pavement consisting of AIL and SAMI as the interlayer.
Overall, it was found that the pavement model with SAMI as interlayer depicted lower strains in
each layer compared to the pavement with AIL as the interlayer. This observation has a serious
implication when it comes to sustainability and material availability aspect as in general for a given
design traffic, the total crust thickness of the inverted pavements are lower compared to
conventional flexible pavements (IRC-37, TG-2). As the aggregate interlayer is very near to the
direct load, it should be constructed with high-quality aggregates and also a specific construction
practice should be followed to develop proper interlocking between the aggregates. On the other
hand, pavement with SAMI as interlayer does not require such high-quality aggregate as there is
no AIL layer. Further, the total pavement thickness will be reduced when the SAMI interlayer is
adopted compared to the pavement composition with the AIL interlayer.

5. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The pavement models were analyzed considering the materials to be elastic and isotropic.
However, the asphalt layer is considered to be viscoelastic, while the aggregate interlayer is
considered to be anisotropic. The elastic and isotropic assumption was made due to lack of
experimental data and considering the fact the most of the pavement design guidelines assume a
similar material characteristic and are well accepted. Further, the effect of temperature was not
considered in the models.

6. CONCLUSIONS

The 3D FE models were developed using Abaqus to study the behavior of inverted pavement
systems with different crack relief layers when subjected to dual wheel and wide base tire loading
assembly. Based on the analysis, the following conclusions are made:
 The pavement with aggregate interlayer showed higher strains in different layers compared
to the pavement with SAMI interlayer. However, this difference was significant in the
asphalt layer and reduced in the lower layers.
 The asphalt layer did not show tensile strains in the pavement with SAMI interlayer
indicating enhanced serviceable life.
 The tensile strain at the top in the crack tips in CTB may result in material degradation due
to periodic loosening. This can be reduced to an extent by adopting a skewed groove cutting
methodology as the effect of load can be reduced.

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 315

 The linear models were able to predict that the aggregate interlayer was in compression
both in the top and bottom surface, which is a representative behavior of AIL.
 The wide base tires resulted in higher strains in the pavement with aggregate interlayer
especially in the asphalt layer, while no much difference between dual wheel assembly and
wide base tires was seen in the pavement with SAMI interlayer.
 The wide base tires showed around 15 microns higher transverse tensile strain in the CTB
layer but 5 microns lower longitudinal tensile strain compared to the dual wheel assembly.
 Overall, it can be seen that pavement with the SAMI layer seems to provide a viable option
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

with lower total pavement thickness without comprising the structural performance.

REFERENCES

1. Cortes Avellaneda, D. D. (2010). Inverted Base Pavements, Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of
Technology.
2. Flintsch, G. W., Diefenderfer, B. K., and Nunez, O. (2008). Composite Pavement Systems:
Synthesis of Design and Construction Practices, FHWA/VTRC 09-CR2.
3. Tutumluer, E., and Barksdale, R. D. (1995). Inverted Flexible Pavement Response and
Performance, Journal of Transportation Research Record, Paper No. 1482, pp. 102-110,
Transportation Research Board.
4. Cortes, D. D., Shin, H., and Santamarina, J. C. (2012). Numerical Simulation of Inverted
Pavement Systems, Journal of Transportation Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 138, Issue No. 12,
pp. 1507-1519.
5. Terrel, R. G., Cox, B. R., Stokoe, K. H., II, Allen, J. J., and Lewis, D. (2003). Field Evaluation
of the Stiffness of Unbound Aggregate Base Layers in Inverted Flexible Pavements, Journal
of Transportation Research Record, Paper No. 1837, pp. 50-60, Transportation Research
Board.
6. Ogundipe, O. M., Thom, N., and Collop, A. (2013a). Investigation of crack resistance
potential of stress absorbing membrane interlayers(SAMIs) under traffic loading,
Construction and Building Materials, Elsevier. Vol. 38, pp. 658-666.
7. Ogundiep, O. M., Thom, N., and Collop, A. (2013b). Evaluation of performance of stress-
absorbing membrane interlayer (SAMI) using accelerated pavement testing, International
Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol. 14, Issue No. 6, pp. 569-578.
8. Ogundiep, O. M., Thom, N., and Collop, A. (2014). Finite element analysis of overlay
incorporating stress absorbing membrane interlayers against reflective cracking, Journal of
Modern Transport, Springer, Vol. 22, Issue No. 2, pp. 104-111.
9. Al-Qadi, I. L., and Wang, H. (2009). Evaluation of Pavement Damage Due to New Tire
Designs, Research Report ICT -09-048, Illinois Centre for Transportation.
10. Moazami, D., Muniady, R., Hamid, H., and Md. Yusoff, Z.. (2011). Effect of tire footprint
area in pavement response studies, International Journal of the Physical Sciences Vol. 6,
Issue No.21, pp. 5040-5047.
11. Pais, J. C., and Pereira, P. A. A. (2000) Predictions of existing reflective cracking potential of
flexible pavements. Proceedings of 4th International RILEM Conference, Ontario, 155–164.
12. IRC:37. (2018). Guidelines for the Design of Flexible Pavements, Indian Roads Congress,
New Delhi, India.
13. George, K. P. (2001). Soil Stabilization Field Trial, Interim Report, Mississippi Department
of Transportation.

© ASCE
 Airfield and Highway Pavements 2021 316

14. Button, J. W., and Lytton, R. L. (1987). Evaluation of Fabrics, Fibers and Grids in Overlays,
Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements,
Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 925-934.
15. IRC:37. (2018). Guidelines for the Design of Flexible Pavements, Indian Roads Congress
(IRC), New Delhi.
16. TG-2 (Technical Guide-2). (2020). A Guideline for the Design and Construction of Bitumen
Emulsion and Foamed Bitumen Stabilized Materials, South African Bitumen Association
(SABITA).
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anush Chandrappa on 06/16/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

© ASCE