You are on page 1of 8

ICSDEC 2012 ASCE 2013

473

Use of Geosynthetics to Stabilize Recycled Aggregates in Roadway Construction


Jie Han, Ph.D., PE. and Jitendra K. Thakur
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ Of Maryland on 04/18/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, the University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; 785-864-3714, jiehan@ku.edu Abstract During the re-construction of existing roads including highways and railways, a large amount of concrete and asphalt pavements and ballast are removed and disposed. For sustainable use of these materials, they have been increasingly recycled as aggregates for the construction of roadways. Due to the existence of asphalt, cement, and fines, the mechanical properties (mainly strength and stiffness) of recycled aggregates decrease. They may also have long-term durability problems, such as the breakage and abrasion of crushed concrete and creep of recycled asphalt pavement. Geosynthetics (including geotextile, geogrid, and geocell) have been used to improve the mechanical properties and long-term durability of recycled aggregates. This paper reviews recent research work on the use of geosynthetics to stabilize recycled aggregates in roadway construction and summarizes the main research findings including the permanent, resilient, and creep deformations, stress distribution, strength, and modulus of geosynthetic-reinforced recycled aggregates. Keywords: Asphalt, ballast, concrete, geosynthetic, recycled aggregate, sustainability 1 Introduction

According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA, 2004), two billion tons of aggregates are quarried annually in the United States and the quantity of quarried aggregates will reach 2.5 billion tons by 2020, which force construction industries to consider new sources of aggregates. Highways and railways that have reached the end of their service lives are frequently rehabilitated by removing the existing roadway surfaces and replacing the removed portion with new construction materials. A large amount of recycled aggregates are created every year during the rehabilitation and reconstruction of existing highways and railways. Currently, great emphasis is placed on sustainable construction and infrastructure with green technology because the demand for sustainable and environmental-friendly roads is increasing daily. More technologies for sustainable roadway construction are needed. One way to construct sustainable roads is through the use of recycled aggregates. Recycled Asphalt Pavement (RAP), Recycled Concrete Aggregate (RCA), and Recycled Ballast (RB) are the three types of recycled aggregates discussed in this paper.

ICSDEC 2012

ICSDEC 2012 ASCE 2013

474

According to the Recycled Material Resource Center (RMRC, 2008), RAP is a removed and reprocessed pavement material from deteriorated asphalt pavements containing asphalt binder (3 to 7%) and aggregates (97 to 93%) by weight. The use of RAP has been in practice since 1930s. The U.S. FHWA estimated that 100.1 million tons of asphalt pavement materials are milled off each year during resurfacing and widening of road projects, of which 80.3 million tons are reclaimed and reused for roadbeds, shoulders, and embankments (Missouri Asphalt Pavement Association, 2010). RCA is a removed and reprocessed construction material from demolished concrete structures, such as high-rise buildings, bridges, highways, railways, etc. containing cement and aggregates. The aggregates contain 60 to 75% of the total volume of RCA (RMRC, 2008). Ballast is a free-draining granular material composed of medium to coarse gravel-sized aggregates (10-60 mm) with a small percentage of cobble-sized particles, commonly used as a load-bearing material in railway tracks (Indraratna et al., 2006). The good quality of ballast consists of angular particles with rough surface and minimum hairline cracks and should have high specific gravity, shear strength, toughness and hardness, and enough resistance to weathering (Indraratna et al., 2006). Railway ballast degrades and deteriorates progressively under repeated cyclic loading which is usually replaced by fresh ballast during routine track maintenance. The railway track constructed using recycled ballast (RB) shows excessive settlement and lateral deformation affecting the performance of railroad. The use of recycled aggregates can reduce the cost of construction materials, reduce the amount of waste to be land-filled, reduce the transportation and energy costs to import virgin aggregates, and conserve natural resources by requiring less virgin aggregate in road construction projects. Several agencies are seriously considering the economic and environmental benefits of using recycled aggregates in roadways and facing challenges to maintain high-quality road infrastructures. The mechanical properties (mainly strength and stiffness) and long term durability (breakage and abrasion) of recycled aggregates decrease due to the existence of asphalt and cement, or loss of angularity of ballast. In the past, most of the research studies on the improvement of RAP and RCA quality focused on blending them with virgin aggregates or stabilizing them using chemical additives. However, the blending of RAP and RCA with virgin aggregate still consumes natural resources and the chemical stabilization is not environmental friendly. The use of 100% recycled aggregate with geosynthetic is a sustainable solution. Recently, some research work has been done to evaluate the quality of recycled aggregate using geosynthetics (Han et al, 2011; 2012a; b, c; Liu et al., 1998; Indraratna et al., 2002, 2006). Geosynthetics manufactured from polymeric materials have been widely used as construction materials to solve many civil engineering problems since 1970s. Geosynthetics are used to improve the performance of unpaved and paved roads for over 40 years (Giroud and Han, 2004). The use of geotextile, geogrid, and geocell with recycled aggregates are discussed in this paper. Geotextile and geogrid are planar geosynthetics whereas geocell is a threedimensional honeycomb type of geosynthetic. Geogrid and geocell improves the performance of aggregate layers by providing confinement whereas geotextile improves the performance by providing a tensioned membrane effect. This paper

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ Of Maryland on 04/18/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ICSDEC 2012

ICSDEC 2012 ASCE 2013

475

reviews recent research work on the use of geosynthetics to stabilize recycled aggregates (RAP, RCA, and RB) in roadway construction and summarizes the main research findings, 2 Geosynthetic-Reinforced Recycled Asphalt Pavement (RAP)

Geocell is used for stabilizing RAP bases. The permanent deformation, resilient deformation, creep deformation, stress distribution, and stiffness improvement factor for geocell-reinforced RAP bases are discussed in this section: Han et al. (2011) conducted moving wheel tests on five geocell-reinforced and two unreinforced RAP bases over weak subgrade of target CBR 3% to evaluate the effect of geocell reinforcement in terms of rut depth and stress distribution angle at a number of passes of the wheel load. Two types of recycled asphalt materials, named RAP and FRAP (fractioned RAP or RAP with finer gradation) were used in this study. The following base sections were prepared and tested: 30 cm thick unreinforced RAP, 15 cm thick geocell-reinforoced RAP with a 2 cm thick RAP cover, 10 cm thick geocell-reinforced RAP with a 7 cm thick RAP cover, double layered geocell-reinforced RAP with a 3 cm thick RAP cover above a 10 cm thick bottom geocell layer and a 7 cm thick RAP cover above a 10 cm thick top layer, 25 cm thick unreinforced FRAP, 10 cm thick geocell-reinforced FRAP over a 10 cm unreinforced FRAP base course with a 5 cm thick FRAP cover, and 7.5 cm geocellreinforced FRAP over a 10 cm thick unreinforced FRAP base course with a 7.5 cm thick FRAP cover. They found that the novel polymeric alloy (NPA) geocell improved the life of unpaved sections by a factor of 1.3 for the reinforced section with one layer of 7.5 cm high geocell and 1.8 for the reinforced section with one layer of 10 cm high geocell at a rut depth of 7.5 cm as compared with the unreinforced section at the same rut depth. They concluded that the geocell reduced the rut depth and vertical stresses transferred to the subgrade by distributing the load over a wider area. Acharya (2011) conducted large-scale cyclic plate loading tests on asphalt pavements with geocell-reinforced RAP bases over moderate subgrade (target CBR = 5%) and concluded that geocell reduced the permanent deformation of HMA layer, RAP base, and subgrade, reduced the vertical stress at the interface of base and subgrade, increased the elasticity of RAP base. Thakur et al. (2012b) conducted large-scale cyclic plate loading tests on one unreinforced FRAP (fractionated RAP) base (30 cm thick) and three geocell-reinforced bases (15, 23, and 30 cm thick) over weak subgrade (target CBR = 2%) to evaluate the permanent deformation behavior of unreinforced and geocell-reinforced RAP bases over weak subgrade. The permanent deformation, the resilient deformation, the vertical stress at the interface of base and subgrade, and the strain in the geocell wall were measured during the cyclic plate loading tests. The permanent deformations of the unreinforced and reinforced bases over weak subgrade at the center of the loading plate versus the number of loading cycles are shown in Fig. 1. The permanent deformation increased with the number of loading cycles. The rate of increase in the permanent deformation decreased with an increase in the number of loading cycles. On the weak subgrade, the geocellreinforced (15 cm, 23 cm, and 30 cm) RAP bases improved the performance by a

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ Of Maryland on 04/18/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ICSDEC 2012

ICSDEC 2012 ASCE 2013

476

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ Of Maryland on 04/18/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

factor of 6.4, 3.6, and 19.4 over the 30 cm thick unreinforced RAP base, respectively, at 75 mm permanent deformation. The 23 cm thick geocell-reinforced base had less improvement factor than the 15 cm geocell-reinforced base because of the lower CBR values of the base and subgrade in the 23 cm thick base as compared with the 15 cm thick base. They concluded that geocell-reinforced RAP bases provided a sustainable solution for roadway construction technology, and improved the performance of RAP bases by reducing permanent deformation of RAP bases, reducing the vertical stresses transferred to the subgrade, and increasing the percentage of resilient deformation of RAP bases.

Fig. 1. Permanent deformations at the center versus the number of loading cycles for RAP bases over weak subgrade (Thakur et al., 2012b) Thakur et al. (2012c) conducted static plate loading tests in a test box and a compaction mold at a room temperature of about 25C to investigate the effects of confinement, stress, and cover on creep deformations of unreinforced and geocellreinforced RAP bases. The plate load tests were conducted at vertical stresses of 276 kPa and 552 kPa under five confining conditions. They concluded that geocell reduced the initial deformation and the rate of creep of the RAP bases, RAP bases crept more at a higher vertical stress and a lower degree of confinement, and the wellgraded aggregate cover significantly reduced the creep of geocel-reinforced RAP bases as compared with the RAP cover. They also investigated the vertical stressdisplacement responses of the following RAP specimens: unreinforced sample (unreinforced RAP sample extruded from a Proctor compaction mold), unreinforced base (a RAP base prepared in a test box without geocell), single geocell-confined base (a RAP base prepared by placing RAP into the single geocell pocket and the test box), multi geocell-confined base (a RAP base prepared by placing RAP into the multiple geocell pockets and the test box). The applied vertical stress versus displacement curves are shown in Fig. 2. They found that the unreinforced RAP sample failed at 172 kPa while other sections did not fail up to a vertical stress of 586 kPa and showed a linear vertical stress-displacement response. The stressdisplacement responses were analyzed in terms of a modulus improvement factor.

ICSDEC 2012

ICSDEC 2012 ASCE 2013

477

The test results showed that the moduli of the single geocell-confined and the multi geocell-confined bases were increased by 1.2 and 1.6 times compared to the unreinforced base, respectively.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ Of Maryland on 04/18/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 2. Vertical stress-displacement curves for unreinforced and geocell-reinforced RAP bases (modified from Thakur et al., 2012c) 3 Gesosynthetic-Reinforced Recycled Concrete Aggregate (RCA)

Liu et al. (1998) performed finite element analysis on asphalt concrete pavements with geogrid reinforced recycled concrete aggregate and natural aggregate bases to evaluate the performance of the geogrid-reinforced RCA base with respect to the recycled masonry aggregate (RMA) base and the crushed natural aggregate (CNA) base. They denoted RCA, RMA, and NA as CC (crushed concrete), CM (crushed masonry), and CN (crushed natural aggregate), respectively. Influence of the material characteristics of the recycled aggregate and the geogrid reinforcement on the development and rate of propagation of reflective cracking in the top layer of the pavement was selected as the criterion for comparison purpose. They used stress intensity factor (K) distributions for both unreinforced and reinforced pavements to evaluate the performance in terms of the energy available at a crack tip for additional crack propagation. Fig. 3 shows that geogrid reinforcement reduced the K factor for different base materials thus improved the pavement performance. In Fig. 3, RF stands for a reinforced base and no RF stands for an unreinforced base. They concluded that geogrid reduced the rate of crack propagation into the top layer of the pavement, improved the load spreading in the base layer, and enhanced the pavement life. The geogrid-reinforced RCA base performed better than the unreinforced natural crushed aggregate base followed by the unreinforced RCA base, the reinforced RMA, and the unreinforced RMA.

ICSDEC 2012

ICSDEC 2012 ASCE 2013

478

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ Of Maryland on 04/18/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 3. K factor distribution versus crack length (Liu et al., 1998) 4 Gesosynthetic-Reinforced Recycled Ballast (RB)

Indraratna et al. (2002) conducted large-scale laboratory cyclic load tests in a cubical triaxial chamber simulating the field load and boundary conditions on unstablized and geogrid-stabilized, and geogrid-geotextile composite stabilized fresh and recycled ballasts. Indraratna and Salim (2003), Indraratna et al. (2005), and Indraratna et al. (2006) conducted cyclic laboratory triaxial tests in a prismoidal chamber simulating field loading conditions on unstablized and geotextile-stabilized fresh and recycled ballasts. The test sections consisted of 50 mm thick subgrade, a 100 mm thick subbase layer (i.e.. a capping layer of gravel and sand), 300 mm thick load bearing ballast, and a 150 mm thick crib ballast layer of fresh or recycled ballast. They found that the geosynthetics (woven geotextile, geogrid, and geogrid-geotextile composite) at the interface of ballast and the capping layer reduced the amount and rate of vertical and lateral deformations. The wet RB had more deformations than the dry RB. They calibrated a semi-logarithmic equation (S = A + B LogN) to predict the settlement of RB, where A and B are empirical constants depending on the initial compaction, type of ballast, type of reinforcement, magnitude of cyclic loading, and degree of saturation, N is the number of load cycles, and S is the tie settlement. Indraratna et al. (2005) reported that the optimum location of the geosynthetic was 200 mm beneath the tie (also called sleeper) to improve the railway track performance; however, it was easy to place the geosynthetic at the ballast-capping interface. Fig. 4 shows the effects of geosynthetic reinforcement and saturation on the behavior of fresh and recycled ballast. Indraratna et al. (2010) conducted full-scale moving wheel load tests on test track sections. Four test sections (two unreinforced and two geogrid-geotextile reinforced, 15 m each in length) were prepared and tested. The track had an overall bed thickness of 450 mm with a 300 m thick ballast layer and a 150 mm thick capping layer. The geocomposite (geogrid-geotextile) improved the performance of reinforced track sections by reducing the vertical and lateral strains in the ballast layer of the reinforced track sections as compared with the unreinforced sections.

ICSDEC 2012

ICSDEC 2012 ASCE 2013

479

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ Of Maryland on 04/18/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(a) Indraratna et al. (2002)

(b) Indraratna and Salim (2003)

Fig. 4. Ballast settlement versus number of loading cycles 5 Conclusions

The following conclusions can be made from the review of previous studies on geosynthetic-reinforced recycled aggregates: (1) 100% recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) with geocell confinement and 100% recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) with geogrid reinforcement have been used as base course materials for sustainable roadway construction. (2) 100% recycled ballast (RB) with geosynthetic reinforcement (woven geotextile, geogrid, and geogrid and non-woven geotextile composite) has been used as a load bearing ballast layer in railway track construction. (3) Geocell improved the performance of RAP bases by reducing the permanent deformation, vertical stress transferred to the subgrade, increasing the percentage of resilient deformation, and increasing the modulus of the RAP bases. (4) Geogrid improved the performance of RCA bases in flexible pavements by reducing the rate of crack propagation into the top layer of the pavement and spreading the load in the base layer in a wider area. (5) Geosynthetics (woven geotextile, geogrid, geogrid and non-woven geotextile composite) improved the performance of recycled ballast by reducing the vertical and lateral deformations and enhancing the long-term durability. References Acharya, B. (2011). Experimental Study on Geocell-Reinforced Flexible Pavements with Recycled Asphalt Pavement (RAP) Bases under Cyclic Loading. M.S. thesis, CEAE Department, the University of Kansas. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA, 2004). Transportation Applications of Recycled Concrete Aggregates. FHWA State of the Practice National Review.

ICSDEC 2012

ICSDEC 2012 ASCE 2013

480

Giroud, J.P. and Han, J. (2004). Design method for geogrid-reinforced unpaved roads. I. development of design method. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 130 (8), 775-786. Han, J., Pokharel, S.K., Yang, X., Manandhar, C., Leshchinsky, D., Halahmi, I., Parsons, R.L., 2011. Performance of geocell-reinforced RAP bases over weak subgrade under full-scale moving wheel loads. ASCE Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 23(11), 15251534. Indraratna, B., Khabbaz, H., Salim, W., and Christie, D. (2006). Geotechnical properties of ballast and the role of geosynthetics in rail track stabilization. Journal of Ground Improvement, 10(3), 91-102. Indraratna, B., Salim, W., and Christie, D.H. (2002). Improvement of recycled ballast using geosynthrtics. Rail International, 33(4), 20-29. Indraratna, B., Shahin, M.A., ad Salim, W. (2005). Use of geosynthetics for stabilizing recycled ballast in railway track substructures. Proceedings of NAGS2005/ GRI 19 Cooperative Conference, 1-15. Indraratna. B. and Salim, W. (2003). Deformtion and degradation mechanism of recycled ballast stabilized with geosynthetics. Soils and Foundations, 43(4), 35-46. Indraratna, B., Nimbalkar, S., Christie, D., Rujikiatkamojorn, C., and Jayan, V. (2010). Field assessment of the performance of a ballasted rail track with and without geosynthetics. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 136(7), 907-917. Liu, X., Scarpas, A., Blaauwendraad, J., and Genske, D.D. (1998). Geogrid reinforcing of recycled aggregate materials for road construction: Finite Element Investigation. Transportation Research Record, 1611, 78-85. Missouri Asphalt Pavement Association (2010). Recycling of Asphalt Pavement. Retrieved December 10, 2010: http://www.moasphalt.org/facts/environmental/recycling.htm. Recycled Material Research Center (RMRC, 2008). User Guideline for Byproducts and Secondary Use Materials in Pavement Construction. Retrieved May 24, 2012 from: http://www.recycledmaterials. org/tools/uguidelines/rcc4.asp. Thakur, J.K., Han, J., Pokharel, S.K., Parsons, R.L. (2012a). A large test box study on geocell-reinforced recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) bases over weak subgrade under cyclic loading. State of the Art and Practice in Geotechnical Engineering, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 225, R.D. Hryciw, A. Athanasopoulos-Zekkos, and Yesiller, N. (editors), 1562-1571. Thakur, J.K., Han, J., Pokharel, S.K., and Parsons, R.L. (2012b). Performance of geocell-reinforced recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) bases over weak subgrade under cyclic plate loading. Submitted for possible publication in Geotextiles and Geomembranes. Thakur, J.K., Han, J., and Parsons, R.L. (2012c). Creep behavior of geocellreinforced recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) bases. Submitted for possible publication in ASCE Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ Of Maryland on 04/18/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ICSDEC 2012

You might also like