SEC18: Proceedings of the 11th Structural Engineering Convention - 2018

Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India, December 19 - 21, 2018

Paper No. 20180131

IMPROVEMENT IN PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE USING

INTERLAYER MEMBRANE SYSTEM: A FEM APPROACH

Arijit Kumar Banerji1*, Pijush Topdar2, Aloke K Datta3

1
Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, NIT Durgapur, Durgapur, INDIA
*
E-mail: arijit.banerji@bcrec.ac.in
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, NIT Durgapur, Durgapur, INDIA
E-mail: topdar72@yahoo.co.uk
3
Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, NIT Durgapur, Durgapur, INDIA
E-mail: dattarec@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

Pavement performance is assessed by the ability to withstand traffic loads and serviceability
over a period of time. Need of enhanced pavement performance has led the researchers to use
composite reinforcing material as interlayer membrane system. In this study, three dimension
finite element model of the asphalt pavement is created for the aim of analyzing total
deformation and mechanistic responses under static loading. Jute geo-textile, rubber asphalt
composite and sand asphalt are used as reinforcement materials at three specific interface
positions; i.e, sub-grade and sub-base; base course and sub-base course; as well as base
course and binder course layer of the pavement structure for assessing the interlayer bonding
strength. The results show that the new way of modification with composite reinforcing
materials were successful in improving the pavement performance by producing lower rate of
stress, strain, and displacement. However, the improvement was more significant when
placed in the location between base and sub-base interfaces in the selected model.

Keywords: Finite element model, Interlayer membrane, Mechanistic response, Pavement

performance.

performances are required so that the road

NOMENCLATURE service life can be effectively extended.
Currently, the most commonly used
3D three dimensional maintenance stratagem for improving the
ARAMI asphalt rubber absorbing membrane pavement performance towards distress problem
FEA finite element analysis is by reinforcing with interlayer membrane
HMA hot mix asphalt system as composite structures. Although usage
JG jute geotextile of such composite structures are associated with
RAC rubber asphalt composite pavement rehabilitation to resist fatigue and/or
SA sand asphalt rutting failure mechanisms propagated through
SAMI stress absorbing membrane interlayer reflection cracking [1].
URM unreinforced model In general, fabrics or geotextiles, geo-grids,
geo-net, geo-composite, geo-synthetics, steel
1. INTRODUCTION netting, vulcanized rubber modified binder,
glass fiber, chip seal composites etc. as a SAMI
Damage of pavement structure by the combined are executed for pavement rehabilitation.
effects of traffic loading and environmental Basically, the interlayers system improve the
conditions leads to road unserviceability. performance of the overlays by providing stress
Therefore, improvement in pavement relief, reinforcement and moisture control [2].

HE1 | P a g e

However, the interlayer needs sufficient cross-
sectional area and modulus to improve the
strength and performance of pavement by
increase in traffic load bearing capacity and its
life expectancy from reduced cracking and
damage of different layers. Hence, a proper
understanding of the behavior of interlayers
system in performance prediction is necessary to
select an appropriate material for any pavement
structure.
2. BACKGROUND
Many researchers around the world have
explored the efficacy of various interlayer
systems to retard pavement distress in the
laboratory, field observations and though FEA
techniques. The use of interlayer membrane as
stress relief layers and reinforcement layers
diminish the occurrence of cracking by
developing localized stresses in the vicinity of
the existing crack [3] and allowing the
movement (vertical/horizontal) of the
underlying pavement layers without causing
large tensile stresses [4]. Some of the major
findings from the literature implementing FEA
techniques reported that the location of an
interlayer in a pavement system is crucial in
absorbing tensile strains mobilized during
loading. Likewise, Kim and Buttlar [3]
evaluated the critical stress responses developed
in an asphalt overlay system placed over a
thermally cracked flexible pavement using FEA
and found that the use of interlayer below the
asphalt overlay greatly reduces tensile and shear
stresses. A similar type of result using sand mix
and steel netting interlayer under the overlay
was obtained by Baek and Qadi [5] using 3D
FEA. A transient moving load was applied to
obtain time-dependent responses and it was
observed that sand mix interlayer and steel
netting interlayer significantly reduces reflective
cracking due to strong shear deformation
support and high tensile strain compensation in
the overlay. Similarly, Al-Azzawi [6] evaluated
the benefits of using geogrid in flexible
pavements using FE simulation and observed
higher tension stress absorption when the
geogrid is placed between the base course layer
and subbase layer. Even, the settlement over the
loading area of reinforced pavement reduced
when compared with unreinforced pavement.
The effects of geo-composite interlayers on
reflective crack retardation was evaluated by
Elseifi and Al-Qadi [7] using two dimensional
HE2 | P a g e
SEC18: Paper No. 20180131
FE model and it was observed that the geo-
composite membrane would be effective on the
crack propagation phase, only if the crack does
not pass through the interlayer and propagates
horizontally at the interlayer–existing pavement
interface. Shatnawi et al. [8] studied asphalt
rubber interlayer benefits on reflective crack
retardation in overlays over rigid pavements and
observed that a stress reduction ranging from
92% to 98% was achieved with the use of
ARAM interlayer compared to non-ARAM
interlayer system. Soft ARAM interlayers were
found to be more effective in reducing stress
and strain levels compared to hard ARAM
interlayers. Even, it was also found that the use
of levelling course (similar to HMA layer)
below the interlayers was very beneficial in
lowering the strain levels and in increasing
pavement life.
Key findings from the literature mostly
reveals that interlayers are effective in
minimizing reflective cracking distress and in
extending pavement life, even some mixed
performance of the interlayers were observed,
when placed in a new asphalt overlay. However,
the general practice is to place the interlayer
with an appropriate tack coat at the interface.
In this backdrop, the current study aims to
replicate the scenario through FEA technique.
The objective is to evaluate the improvements in
pavement performance utilizing three types of
stress absorbing interlayer membrane system
with the aid of using them at three specific
interface positions (subgrade and sub base, base
and sub base as well as base and binder layer) of
the pavement structure.
3. INTERLAYER MEMBRANES AS
REINFORCING MATERIAL
Interlayer membranes are basically a layer of
soft material which is applied on the old
pavement surface prior to placing the overlay.
The function of these interlayer as reinforcing
material is to absorb any type of movement
taking place at the joint of crack opening and
thus disperse the stress before it reaches the
overlay. The materials used as interlayers have
exhibited varying degrees of success, and their
usage within a particular agency has been based
primarily on materials appears to have merit and
cost effectiveness.
In this study, three types of interlayers viz. a
jute geotextile, a rubber asphalt composite and a
sand asphalt were considered. They are
provided as interlayers having 1cm thickness.
 SEC18: Paper No. 20180131

3.1 Jute geo-textile

GEOJUTE is the commercial name of geo-

textile product woven from jute fibers used for
filtration, drainage and soil stabilization in
pavement. It also prevent extreme variations in
soil moisture and temperature. The tensile yield
strength of the material is taken as 200 MPa,
young’s modulus as 20,000 MPa, density as
1300 kg/m3 and poisson’s ratio of 0.38 [9].

3.2 Rubber Asphalt

RAC mixtures obtained great attention from

many transportation agencies worldwide
because of their ability to improve pavement
performance compared to conventional designs.
They can exert different benefits to the
pavements such as noise reduction, resistance to Fig. 1 Layered Pavement 3D Model
rutting, reduction in asphalt thickness, and
resistance against cracking. The stiffness of the The pavement includes five layers viz. surface
material is taken as 170 MPa, density as 1200 course, binder course, base course, sub-base
kg/m3 and poisson’s ratio of 0.35 [10]. course and soil subgrade of thickness 0.05 m,
0.10 m, 0.15 m, 0.35 m and 3.0 m respectively.
3.3 Sand Asphalt The pavement layers were merged together to
satisfy the assumption of continuity between
In the stabilization of cohesionless soil with layers. A total of 10 combination scenarios
asphalt, the mixture serves a dual purpose of involving three different interlayer composites
binding soil particles together to give cohesion and three different locations were analysed.
to the mass, and of water-proofing the mixture.
The SA with very low stiffness was chosen to 4.2 Calculation Parameters
evaluate an extreme case with 40/60 penetration
grade bitumen. The elastic modulus of the Pavement layers are comprised of different
material is taken as 118 MPa at 30°C, density is materials, which includes bituminous material,
2000 kg/m3 and poisson’s ratio is of 0.45 [4]. granular material and soil. The 3D finite
element modelling of a typical flexible
4. METHODOLOGY pavement structure consists of selecting the
appropriate dimensions of a finite domain and
4.1 Three Dimensional Finite Element material properties to simulate the realistic
Model Formulation behaviour. Even to simulate the stress
dependency of the moduli, the structural layers
To simulate the pavement layered system, full were divided into sub-layers with the different
3D geometric models is used using finite- strength parameters. The pavement layer
element computer program. The finite-element properties are shown in Table 1.
method is well suited for analysing pavement
problems involving material nonlinearities and Table 1 Material Properties of Pavement Layers
static/complex loading. Such analysis proceeds
by defining the characteristics of each pavement Elastic Poisson’s Density
layer, including boundary and loading Layer Modulus Ratio (v) (kg/m3)
conditions. The finite-element computer (MPa)
program ANSYS 17.1 is used for analysis. The Surface 2600 0.35 2280
pavement-soil system is idealized as an 2280
Binder 2200 0.35
assemblage of brick 8-node solid element. Each
node of the elements has three translational Base 1650 0.35 2330
degrees of freedom. For simplicity, the length 2350
Sub-base 110 0.40
and width of the pavement model are considered
as 5.0 m and 4.0 m respectively. The model Subgrade 30 0.45 1800
geometry used in this study is shown in Fig. 1.

HE3 | P a g e
 SEC18: Paper No. 20180131

4.3 Loading Conditions

Table 3 Pavement Response Characteristics at
When the vehicle is running in the center of the Sub-base and Base Interface
pavement surface, there is no response at either
end of the pavement (far from the vehicle), so a Model Maximum Maximum Maximum
fixed constraint is applied at each end. To Type Deflection Stress Strain
simulate the field condition, degrees of freedom (mm) (MPa)
along the vertical direction are fully constrained, URM 1.52 2.02 .0018
at the bottom plane of the model and for the .0008
JG 1.02 1.21
edges perpendicular to traffic direction lateral
displacement are constrained. No boundary RAC 1.25 1.33 .0012
condition is applied to the top layer. .0013
The performance of pavement affecting by SA 1.26 1.36
static and impact load strongly depends on
contact area and pressure. The tire-pavement Table 4 Pavement Response Characteristics at
contact area is assumed to be similar to a Base and Binder layer Interface
rectangle. In this study, static loading was
applied as a uniform pressure of 800 kPa loaded Model Maximum Maximum Maximum
by standard axle load of 80 kN as per IRC 37- Type Deflection Stress Strain
2012 [11] limits. It is assumed that this load is (mm) (MPa)
transferred to the pavement surface through a URM 1.52 2.02 .0018
contact pressure of a single tire. For numerical JG 1.32 1.56 .0012
modelling, tire contact area dimensions were
taken as 0.25m (length) by 0.35m (width) and RAC 1.44 1.73 .0015
the load was applied at the center of the road SA 1.48 1.84 .0016
cross section.

5. PAVEMENT RESPONSE The graphical results of these simulations are

ANALYSIS: RESULTS AND presented in Fig 2 to 4. Fig 2 shows the
DISCUSSIONS variation of maximum deflection in interface
with distance from the load for three reinforcing
An analytical study was conducted in the materials placed at three specific locations. The
present work to evaluate the effect of interlayers maximum deflection is in the interface at a
on critical pavement responses. Three types of distance of 0.15 m from the top of the model i.e
reinforcing model as interlayers and one type of binder and base course boundary and minimum
URM of paved road were selected. Results of deflection was observed at base and sub-base
maximum deflection, maximum equivalent interface.
stress (von-mises) and maximum equivalent
elastic strain corresponding to the pavement
model with or without incorporating interlayer
membranes at three specific interface locations
viz. subgrade and sub base, sub base and base as
well as base and binder layer of the pavement
structure are reported in Table 2, 3 and 4
respectively.

Table 2 Pavement Response Characteristics at

Subgrade and Sub-base Interface

Model Maximum Maximum Maximum Fig. 2 Effect of interlayer membrane position on

Type Deflection Stress Strain maximum deflection
(mm) (MPa)
URM 1.52 2.02 .0018 It was clear that these materials when placed at
the bottom of base layer has decreased the
JG 1.14 1.30 .0011 deformation and overall JG shows the better
RAC 1.30 1.44 .0013 effectiveness compared to RAC and SA by 29%
and 31% respectively; in addition comparison
SA 1.31 1.46 .0013 with URM reduced rate is of 33%.

HE4 | P a g e
 SEC18: Paper No. 20180131

Maximum stress with distance from the load is
shown in Fig 3. The maximum equivalent stress
is in the interface of base and binder layer i.e
1.94 MPa for sand asphalt when placed at a
distance of 0.15 m from the top of the model
and 1.13 MPa is minimum at 0.3 m for JG . It
was clear that these stresses will be transferred
to interlayers as tension stress when compared
to URM. In this case, JG shows lower stress
value compared to RAC and SA by 30% and
34%; plus URM by 40% respectively.
distributed into wider area of subgrade, and
lower stress, strain, and displacement can be
observed at top of the subgrade layer.
Some of the deformed configuration for the
pavement section representing total deformation
and equivalent stress distribution contour are
shown in Fig. 5 and 6 respectively. From the
figures, the maximum values are observed at the
top layer just under the wheel load application
point.

Fig. 3 Effect of interlayer membrane position on

maximum stress
Fig 4 shows the variation of the strain in the
Fig. 5 Total deformation contour for JG placed
interfaces. The maximum strain arises is in the
at Base-Sub base interface
interface of surface and base course. Basically,
when the load is applied to the surface of the
pavement, a zone of tension is developed at the
lower section of the surface layer, which
produced a higher rate of stain. Likewise, JG
shows lesser strain value compared to RAC, SA
and URM by 46%, 50% and 56% respectively.

Fig. 6 Equivalent stress contour for SA placed at

Fig. 4 Effect of interlayer membrane position on
maximum strain
These results indicates that the improvement in
reduction in stress, strain, and displacement due
to geo-jute is more significant. Such
improvement is mainly due to higher modulus
value of the material compared to other two
interlayers. The stress, strain, and displacement
shows linear relation in reduction of pavement
response compared to URM. Due to
incorporation of interlayer membranes, load is
Base-Sub base interface
Generally, a substantial amount of innovation is
necessary to realize a standardized pavement
management procedure through widespread
applicability for improving pavement
performance. Modelling of such interlayers is
not as straightforward as modelling pavement
layers because mostly SAMI’s are like a strong
and coarse-spaced net or mesh. It is desirable to
model with interconnected elements, however, it

HE5 | P a g e

is beyond the scope of this paper which focuses
on the development and validation of 3D FE
model of flexible pavement for analysing
improvement in pavement performance.
6. CONCLUSIONS
The objective of this study was to evaluate and
compare different composite membranes with
unreinforced flexible pavement by evaluating
the total deformation and mechanistic
responses. Based on the FE results it was
evident that interlayer systems were successful
in improving the pavement performance by
producing lower stress, strain, and
displacement. The settlement over the loading
area of reinforced pavement reduced when
compared with unreinforced pavement. The
improvement was more significant when placed
in the location between base and sub-base
interface in the selected models. The optimum
position was decided based upon the
deformation reduce rate and lower stress-strain
value, where jute geotextile results shows
mostly positive response but cost effectiveness
is questionable. Still, comprehensive analysis is
needed for precise conclusions that how they
affect the bonding between layers along the
pavement’s lifetime. The required innovation
and research should range from short-term
problem solving to strategic efforts for material
and application improvements.
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research has been carried out at National
Institute of Technology, Durgapur, India. The
online & digital library facility has been used
extensively for this work.
REFERENCES
[1] Dhakal, N., Elseifi, M. A., and Zhang, Z.
(2016). “Mitigation strategies for reflection
cracking in rehabilitated pavements–A
synthesis”, International Journal of
Pavement Research and Technology, Vol. 9
(3), 2016, pp. 228-239.
[2] Elseifi, M. A., 2003. Performance
Quantification of Interlayer Systems in
Flexible Pavements Using Finite Element
Analysis, Instrument Response and Non
Destructive Testing. PhD Thesis, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, U.S.A.
HE6 | P a g e
SEC18: Paper No. 20180131
[3] Kim, J and Buttlar, W. G., “Analysis of
reflective crack control system involving
reinforcing grid over base-isolating
interlayer mixture”, Journal of
Transportation Engineering, Vol. 128 (4),
2002, pp. 375-384.
[4] Ogundipe, O. M., Thom, N. H., and Collop,
A. C., “Finite element analysis of overlay
incorporating stress absorbing membrane
interlayers against reflective cracking”,
Journal of Modern Transportation, Vol. 22
(2), 2014, pp. 104-111.
[5] Baek, J., and Al-Qadi, L., “Reflective
cracking: Modeling fracture behavior of
hot-mix asphalt overlays with interlayer
systems”, Proceedings of Asphalt Paving
Technology, Vol. 28, 2009, pp. 789-827.
[6] Al-Azzawi, A. A., “Finite Element analysis
of flexible pavements strengthed with
geogrid”, ARPN Journal of Engineering
and Applied Sciences, Vol. 7 (10), 2012, pp.
1295-1299.
[7] Elseifi, M. A., and Al-Qadi, I. L., “Modeling
of strain energy absorbers for rehabilitated
cracked flexible pavements”, Journal of
Transportation Engineering, Vol. 131 (9),
2005, pp. 653-661.
[8] Shatnawi, S., Pais, J., and Minhoto, M.,
“Asphalt rubber interlayer benefits in
minimizing reflective cracking of overlays
over rigid pavements”, 7th RILEM
International Conference on Cracking in
Pavements, Springer, 2012, pp. 1157-1167.
[9] Abiola, O. S., Kupolati, W. K., Sadiku, E. R.,
& Ndambuki, J. M. (2014). Utilisation of
natural fibre as modifier in bituminous
mixes: A review. Construction and Building
Materials, 54, 305-312.
[10] Jadidirendi, K., 2017, Evaluation of the
Properties of Rubberized Asphalt Binders
and Mixtures, PhD thesis, University f
Nevada, Las Vegas.
[11] IRC: 37, 2012, Guidelines for Design of
Flexible Pavements. Third Revision, Indian
Road Congress, New Delhi, India.