Brief Overview

of Research and Testing

Tensar Biaxial Geogrids for
Reinforcement of Base and Sub-Base
Courses of Flexible Pavements
 Helpful Terms
• SS1 = BX1100 = BR1 (Tensar geogrid)
• SS2 = BX1200 = BR2 (Tensar geogrid)
• TBR = Traffic Benefit Ratio = Traffic
Improvement Factor = TIF
– Cycles to failure with grid vs without grid
• Torsional Rigidity = Torsional Stiffness = Secant
Aperture Stability Modulus
– A measure of lateral restraint
– See work by US Army Corps of Engineers
 Early Research

• University of Waterloo
– 1984 (Haas, 1985)
– Small scale
– CBR of 1% to 8%
TBR = 3 with BX 1100
• University of Nottingham
– 1989
– Large scale, 1.5 K wheel load
TBR = 7 with BX1100
 USACOE (White) Initial Report

• “…geogrids have more

Literature Review on Geotextiles
potential than geotextiles to Improve Pavements for
for reinforcement of General Aviation Airports

flexible pavements.” Prepared by

• “…if geotextiles are used Dewey W. White, Jr.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
in the structure, no February, 1991
structural support should
be attributed to Prepared for
USDOT / FAA, Washington, DC
geotextiles.” Report Number:
Miscellaneous Paper GL-91-3
 Webster Preliminary Testing
(Summarized in White, 1991)
Figure 1: Truck Traffic

• Tested 4 geotextiles and Sections with fabric: worse

---------
3
than control due to
BX1100 grid vs. control slippage
2.5 on the fabric

Perm Surf Deformation (in)

(unreinforced): 2

– Sand subgrade 1.5

– 4” aggregate base layer 1

– 3 loading conditions:
0.5
Geogrid-reinforced section
• 41,900 lb truck
0
0
significantly
2000
outperformed
4000 6000
control
Number of section
Passes of Truck
• 35,000 lb single tire (C-130)
Control
• 70 ton tank Nonwoven Geotextile
BX1100

• Results of truck loading: 200 lb Woven Fabric

400 lb Woven Geotextile
High-Strength Woven Geotextile
 USACOE (Webster) Report
• 2” AC and crushed stone base
• Load applied by 30,000 lb
passing wheel load.
• Use of geogrid is viable for
reducing pavement thickness.
• Resulted in USDOT/FAA
Engineering Brief #49 (guide
specification).
Geogrid Reinforced Base Courses
for Flexible Pavements
for Light Aircraft: Test Section
Construction, Behavior under Traffic,
Laboratory Tests, and Design Criteria
Prepared by
Steve L. Webster
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
December, 1992
Prepared for
USDOT / FAA, Washington, DC
Report Number:
DOT / FAA / RD-92 / 25
Webster: Properties vs. Performance
• “The relatively rigid sheet-type geogrid (BX1200)
performed the best of all products tested. The lighter
weight version (BX1100) of this product performed
second best.
• “One other sheet-type product and one woven-type
product with good strength properties failed to provide
any measurable performance improvement. The
remaining woven-type products provided marginal
performance improvement.”
• Torsional stiffness “showed good correlation with the
Traffic Improvement Factor…”
 Webster: Performance Summary
• Compared 8 identical
GEOSYNTHETIC INCLUSION TBR
sections with different
No geosynthetic (control section) 1.0
geogrids (See table).
Miragrid 5T geogrid at interface 0.9
• Also evaluated BX1200 vs
LB0201/AMP geogrid at interface 0.9
control in 6” and 10” base
Fortrac 35/20-20 geogrid at interface 1.1
on CBR of 8 and found
higher TBR’s (up to 22.4). GB-3022 geogrid at interface 1.6

BX1200 geogrid at midpoint of base 2.2

• Elastic and residual
deformations: showed BX1100 geogrid at interface 2.7

increasing benefit of grid BX1200 geogrid at interface 4.7

with increasing cycles. From Table 5 “Traffic Improvement Factor”

1” Rut Depth, 2” AC, 14” Agg Base, CBR=3
 USACOE Field Test (Webster)
• Unpaved gravel road over CBR <1.
• 41,900 lb military truck, 3 inch rut Field Test
Gravel Road Construction
depth, 2,000 passes of truck. over Very Soft Soils
• 20” with no geosynthetic
Performed by
• 15” with woven or nonwoven Steve L. Webster
geotextile U. S. Army Corps of Engineers

• 10” with BX1200 grid.

• Full depth compaction achieved in
NOT PUBLISHED
grid section, not decreasing with
depth as in sections without grid.
 Webster: Compaction Profile
Looser with depth
CBR=80
Full-depth compaction
GRAVEL CBR=100

GRAVEL

CBR=0.6 CBR=0.6
SOFT SOFT
SUBGRADE SUBGRADE
Control & Geotextile With BX1200
 University of Alaska - Fairbanks
• See Kinney video: TET
funded additional full- Full Scale Testing

scale testing of geogrid- of Tensar Biaxial Geogrids

for Base Course Reinforcement
reinforced base of Flexible Pavements
with Highway Truck Loads
• 4,500 lb truck wheel load
• Developed TBR Prepared by:
Thomas C. Kinney, PE, Ph.D.
relationships presented in Associate Professor

BR96 and used in running University of Alaska - Fairbanks

1996
the SpectraPave program Prepared for:
– 2 to 3 typical for BX1100 Tensar Earth Technologies, Inc.

– 4 to 6 typical for BX1200

 UAF (Kinney) FWD Report
• Very loose silty sand and Using Geogrids for
gravel subbase, CBR = 1, Base Reinforcement
as Measured by a
to simulate thaw condition Falling Weight Deflectometer in a

• 8” to 14” of crushed, Full Scale Laboratory Study

dense-graded base course Prepared by

Thomas C. Kinney, PE, Ph.D.
• BX1200 vs. unreinforced Associate Professor
University of Alaska - Fairbanks

• 2.4 inches of AC Vice President

Shannon and Wilson, Inc.

• Road surface tested using Published by

Transportation Research Board
FWD January, 1998
 Kinney FWD Report
• “The reinforced sections exhibited lower deflections.”
• For reducing elastic deflections as measured by FWD, BX1200 “seems to
be most beneficial at shallow depths of base course.”
• “The addition of geogrid increases the fatigue resistance of the pavement
structure under certain circumstances … The fatigue life of a pavement
structure could be increased by a factor of 1.5 to 4, depending on the exact
configuration and materials.”
• “The effect of geogrid could be considered in other design schemes by
using an equivalent layer thickness with an effective modulus … An
equivalent layer extending from the geogrid to 6 inches above the geogrid
appears reasonable” (for applying the effective modulus).
• “The effective modulus varies widely depending upon the materials and
geometry. The design chart presented, for the conditions and materials
used in this study, indicate an effective modulus of 1 to 6 times the
modulus of the base course material used.”
 Perkins Plate Load Tests
• Applied cyclic plate load.
• AC, gravel base, subgrade Geosynthetic Reinforcement
of Flexible Pavements: Laboratory
CBR’s of 1.5 and 20. Based Pavement Test Sections

• Measured stress and strain Prepared by:

Steven W. Perkins
in base course, subgrade Associate Professor

and geosynthetic. Montana State University - Bozeman

March, 1999

• Compared performance of Prepared for:

BX1100 and BX1200 grid State of Montana DOT

in Cooperation with USDOT / FHWA
to geotextile and control Report No.: FHWA/MT-99-001/8138
(no geosynthetic).
 Traffic Benefit Ratios
Derived from Perkins Figure 5.1.3, Approximate

TBR Based on 1/4" Rut Depth at AC • The geotextile section

Surface “initially developed
permanent deformation
30 28 similarly to the
unreinforced sections”
19
20 • TBR values for the geogrid
reinforced sections are in
10 the range of 7 to 25 for the
1 1
first 1 mm of permanent rut
0 development, illustrating
the effect of reinforcement
Unreinforced Woven Geotextile BX1100 BX1200 is immediate”
 Permanent Surface Deformation
Control Woven Geotextile BX1100 at
at 300 mm* 300 mm*

BX1200 at
300 mm*
BX1100 at
200 mm*
*Depth within a
300 mm thickness
of aggregate base

• “The two geogrid products used provided improvement that

was superior to the geotextile product…”
• “…Placement position and geosynthetic stiffness both appear
to be important parameters.”
 Dynamic Surface Deformation
During Initial Loading
Control -
Unreinforced
Woven
Geotextile
Tensar BX
Geogrids

• For the geogrid reinforced sections, the deflection bowls for

both the dynamic deformations show significant improvement.
 Strain Compatibility
Strain in Geosynthetic Compared to Strain in Base

• “Reasonable
compatibility between
the geogrid and the base
soil is illustrated …”

• “These figures illustrate

less compatibility
between the geotextile
and the base aggregate,
illustrating that greater
slip appears to occur
with the geotextile …”
 Improved Load Spreading
Measured as Vertical Stress at Top of Subgrade

Control -
• “Improved load
Unreinforced
spreading is seen Woven
with the reinforced Geotextile
sections …”
Tensar BX
• “… the section with Geogrids
the geotextile
reinforcement did
not provide the same
level of
improvement as
the ...geogrids.”
 Reduced Rutting of Subgrade
Measured at Top of Subgrade
• “Improving the
vertical stress
distribution on the top
of the subgrade … Control -
Unreinforced
leads to a reduction of
Woven
vertical strain.” Geotextile
• Note the effectiveness Tensar BX
of the geogrid at Geogrids

limiting subgrade
deformation
Number of Cycles