ISSN: 2277-9655

[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164

IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7

IJESRT
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING SCIENCES & RESEARCH
TECHNOLOGY
USAGE OF GEOGRIDS IN FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN
Peketi Madhu Ganesh Yadav*1, Singalareddy Bharath2, Mekala Manoj Kumar3,
Mallem Niranjan Reddy4 & Gadikota ChennaKesava Reddy5
*1,2,3
B. tech Students, Civil Engineering Department, JNTUA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
(AUTONOMOUS) PULIVENDULA, Andhra Pradesh-516390, India
4&5
Adhoc Lecturers, Civil Engineering Department, JNTUA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
(AUTONOMOUS) PULIVENDULA, Andhra Pradesh-516390, India
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1215426

ABSTRACT
As on 31st March 2018, estimates the total road length in India 6,603,293km (4,103,096 mi) making the Indian
road network, the second largest road network in the world after the united states. But the roads are not giving
the desired result due to poor CBR value.
Roads in India have mostly the problems like the formation of potholes, ruts, cracks and localized depression
and settlement, especially during rainy season. These are mainly due to the insufficient bearing capacity of the
subgrade in water saturated condition. The subgrade soil mostly yields low CBR value 2-5%. In the CBR
method of pavement design (IRC:37-2012) the total thickness of pavement increases exponentially with a
decrease in the CBR value of subgrade soil which in turn increases the cost of construction. So, it has been tried
to use the geogrid material for increasing the bearing capacity of the subgrade. Laboratory and simulated field
CBR tests are conducted on soil samples with and without the inclusion of geogrid layer and also by varying the
position of it in the mould. Use of geogrid increases the CBR value of the subgrade and thereby reduces the
pavement thickness considerably up to 40%.
This study will have a positive impact on cost as it will reduce the Project as well as maintenance cost of the
road. Our project will discuss in detail the process and its successful applications.

KEYWORDS: Geogrids, Reinforcement, CBR Value, Flexible Pavement, Sub grade, Highway, Design,
Expansive Soil.

I. INTRODUCTION
One of the major problems faced by the engineers in highway construction in plains and coastal areas of India is
the presence of soft/ loose soil at ground level. Roads constructed over this loose soil demands higher thickness
of granular materials resulting in the high cost of construction. Alternately attempts of reducing the thickness of
pavement layer to make an economic construction will lead to early damage to the pavement which in turn will
make the road unserviceable within a short period after construction. This condition may be further worsened if
supplemented with poor drainage or lack of it. Some states of India is situated in a region of high rainfall area
suffers from poor drainage as well as weak subgrade condition. This is one of the major causes of deplorable
road condition in those states.

Looking at the poor road condition of some states of India use of geogrid is thought for road construction to
improve the performance of roads. Geogrid a geosynthetic manufactured from polymers is selected for this
purpose.

Geogrids used within a pavement system perform two of the primary functions of Geosynthetics: separation and
reinforcements. Due to the large aperture size associated with most commercial geogrid products, geogrids are
typically not used for achieving separation of dissimilar material. The ability of a geogrid to separate two
materials is a function of the gradations of the two materials and is generally outside the specifications for
typical pavement materials. However, geogrids can theoretically provide some measure of separation, albeit
limited. For this reason, separation is a secondary function of geogrids used in pavements. The primary function
of geogrids used pavements in reinforcement, in which the geogrid mechanically improves the engineering
properties of the pavement system. The reinforcement mechanisms associated with geogrids.

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[144]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
1. Over the last three decades, the use of geosynthetics has recorded a tremendous increase in civil
engineering constructions. This is a result of continuous research in laboratory and field all over the globe.
2. Giroud and Noirway (1982) after an extensive study developed design chart of unpaved pavement for
using geosynthetic at the interface of the base layer and subgrade soil. Ramaswamy and Aziz (1989) did
an experimental investigation on the behaviour of jute reinforced subgrade soil under dynamic load.
3. Mehndiratta et al 1993 and Patel, 1990 have reported that standard mould of diameter equal to 3 times the
plunger diameter is found to be inadequate for determination of CBR value as the small size mould will
provide additional confinement to geotextile. Therefore, the diameter of the mould is increased to 5 times
the plunger diameter. Also, to determine the effect of lateral confinement on CBR value of reinforced soil,
mould-plunger diameter ratio (D/d) is varied from 2 to 5 while the vertical pressure (surcharge), the
thickness of the specimen, method of compaction is kept the same as the standard test.
4. Mehndiratta et al (2005) conducted CBR and plate load test on unreinforced and geotextile reinforced
subgrade. It was observed that the increase in elastic moduli of coir reinforced layer when coir is replaced
by synthetic geosynthetic geotextiles are only 5 percent. They also investigated the durability of coir by
accelerating its degradability It was observed that phenol treated coir extends the life of coir. Rao (2007)
has published a compilation of his work on geosynthetics and state of the art developments.
5. Babu et al, 2008 has developed a design methodology using IRC guidelines for the design of coir
geotextiles reinforced road on the basis of laboratory experiment data and mathematical formulations.

III. APPLICATIONS OF GEOGRIDS

Confining the Aggregates

The geogrids serve the function of holding or capturing the aggregates together. This method of interlocking the
aggregates would help in an earthwork that is stabilized mechanically. The apertures in geogrids help in
interlocking the aggregates or the soil that is placed over them. A representation of this concept is shown below.

Fig-1 Representation of Geogrid Confining the aggregates

The geogrids as mentioned above helps in redistribution of load over a wider area. This function has made the
pavement construction more stabilized and strong. It has the following functional mechanisms when applied for
pavement construction:

1. Tension Membrane Effect

This mechanism is based on the concept of vertical stress distribution. This vertical stress is from the deformed
shape of the membrane as shown in the figure below. This mechanism was initially considered as the primary
mechanism. But later studies proved the lateral restraining mechanism is the major criteria that must be taken
into consideration.

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[145]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7

Fig-2 Tension Member Effect

2. Improvement of Bearing Capacity

One of the main mechanism happening after Geogrid installation in pavement is the reduction in lateral
movement of the aggregate. This would result in the elimination of stresses; that if exists would have moved to
the subgrade.

The Geogrid layer possesses sufficient frictional resistance that opposes subgrade lateral movement. This
mechanism hence improves the bearing capacity of the layer. Reduction of outward stresses means inward
stresses are formed, which is the reason behind the increase in bearing capacity.

Fig-3 Mechanism for Improved Bearing Capacity

3. Lateral Restraining Capability

The stresses produced by means of the wheel loadings coming over the pavement results in the lateral
movement of the aggregates. Which in turn affects the stability of the whole pavement arrangement. The
Geogrid act a restraint against this lateral movement.

Fig-4 Lateral Restraining Capability

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[146]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7
Geogrid Material:

Fig-5 1. Uniaxial Geogrid 2. Biaxial Geogrid 3. Triaxial Geogrid

IV. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
 To reduce the thickness of Pavement. So, as to reduce the cost of road construction.
 To Design Pavement thickness based on CBR and msa traffic as per IRC:37-2012.
 To increase the load carrying capacity of the road (Strength of road).
 Increase the Service Life of Road

V. METHODOLOGY
Laboratory and simulated field CBR tests are conducted on soil samples with and without the inclusion of Geo-
grid and also by varying the position of it in the mould.

Fig-6 Inclusion of Geogrid at various Positions

VI. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME, RESULTS & DISCUSSION
1) Traffic data

SL: NO Timings: HCV MCV LCV TWO WHEELERS CYCLES Total

1 8:00 am - 9:00 am 76 11 212 518 5 822
2 9:00 am - 10:00 am 56 15 176 542 1 790
3 10:00 am - 11:00 am 41 15 183 492 1 732
4 11:00 am - 12:00 pm 45 10 160 459 1 675
5 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 37 8 151 414 3 613
6 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm 52 12 146 355 3 568
7 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm 43 16 116 291 4 470
8 3:00 pm - 4:00 pm 49 5 119 279 2 454
9 4:00 pm - 5:00 pm 51 12 177 407 1 648
10 5:00 pm - 6:00 pm 75 11 142 311 2 541
11 6:00 pm - 7:00 pm 56 23 124 330 0 533
12 7:00 pm - 8:00 pm 68 4 149 289 0 510
Total 649 142 1855 4687 23 7356
Table-1 Traffic Data Observables
P=HCV+MCV+LCV= 2646

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[147]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7

Graph-1 Traffic Data

900
800
700 822 790
600 732
500 675 648
Vehicles

613 568
400 541 533 510
300 470 454
200
100
0
8:00 am 9:00 am 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 pm 2:00 pm 3:00 pm 4:00 pm 5:00 pm 6:00 pm 7:00 pm
- 9:00 - 10:00 am - am - pm - - 2:00 - 3:00 - 4:00 - 5:00 - 6:00 - 7:00 - 8:00
am am 11:00 12:00 1:00 pm pm pm pm pm pm pm pm
am pm
Time

Computation of Design Traffic

365∗[(1+𝑟)𝑛 −1]
N= *A*D*F
𝑟
Where,
N = Cumulative number of standard axles to be catered for in the design in terms of msa.
A=Initial traffic in the year of completion of construction in terms of the number of Commercial Vehicles Per
Day (CVPD).
D = Lane distribution factor = 0.5
F = Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF) = 3.5
n = Design life in years = 15
r = Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles in decimal = 7.5%
The traffic in the year of completion is estimated using the following formula: A= P (1 + r) x
Where,
P= Number of commercial vehicles as per last count = 2646
x = Number of years between the last count and the year of completion of construction. (say 1 Year)

By substituting above Values, N Value is Computed as 47.45 msa

2) Grain size distribution: Sample Weight:1000 Grams

IS Sieve No Wt of Soil Retained in %Wt Cummulative %Wt %

(mm) Grams Retained retained finer
4.75 81.80 8.18 8.18 91.82
2.36 65.51 6.55 14.73 85.27
1.18 260.39 26.04 40.77 59.23
0.6 390.00 39.00 79.77 20.23
0.425 0.22 0.02 79.79 20.21
0.3 4.27 0.43 80.22 19.78
0.15 136.82 13.68 93.90 6.10
0.075 34.75 3.48 97.38 2.62
Pan 26.24 2.62 100.00 0.00
Table-2 Grain Size Distribution data

Percentage Fines (Size Less than 75𝜇 ) < 5%

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[148]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7

Graph-2 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

PERCENTAGE FINER BY WEIGHT

100.00

80.00

60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00
10 1 0.1 0.01
PARTICLE SIZE (MM)

𝐷60 1.4
From Graph: C u= = = 7.78
𝐷10 0.18
D10=0.18
𝐷30 2 0.742
D30=0.74 C c= = =2.17
𝐷60 ∗𝐷10 1.4∗0.18
D60=1.4
i.e., %age Finer < 5, Cu>4 & Cc≈ 1 – 3 then as per IS :1498 the Soil is Well Graded Gravel

3) Atterberg Limits

1. Liquid limit of soil used

SL.NO DESCRIPTION I II III

1 Number of Blows 13 26 36
2 Container Number 1 2 3
3 The weight of container + Wet Soil in grams 10.69 11.39 8.27
4 The weight of container +Dry Soil in grams 6.95 7.48 5.48
5 The weight of Water in grams 3.74 3.91 2.79
6 The weight of Dry Soil in grams 6.95 7.48 5.48
7 Water Content (wL) in Percentages 53.81 52.27 50.91
Table-3 Liquid Limit Data of soil sample

Graph-3 LIQUID LIMIT

54.00
WATER CONTENT %

53.00
52.00
51.00
50.00
100 10
NUMBER OF BLOWS

Liquid Limit wL=52.17

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[149]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7
2. Plastic limit

SL.NO DESCRIPTION I II
1 Container Number 1 2
2 The weight of container + Wet Soil in grams 2.1 1.17
3 The weight of container +Dry Soil in grams 1.77 0.99
4 The weight of Water in grams 0.33 0.18
5 The weight of Dry Soil in grams 1.76 0.97
6 Water Content (wP) in Percentages 18.75 18.56
7 Average Plastic Limit WP 18.65
Table-4 Plastic Limit data of soil sample
Plasticity index IP: Liquid Limit – Plastic Limit: 33.52
IP> 17., High Plastic Soil

4) Standard Proctor compaction test

SL NO: DESCRIPTION I II III IV V

1 The weight of mould + Wet soil in W2 in grams 6170 6310 6340 6300 6260
2 The weight of Wet Soil (W2-W1) in grams 1910 2050 2080 2040 2000
3 Moisture Content Container Number 1 2 3 4 5
4 Weight of Container +Wet Soil in grams 70.65 91.90 152.08 111.78 134.85
5 Weight of Container + Dry Soil in grams 62.46 79.51 129.82 93.89 111.70
6 Weight of Water (4-5) in grams 8.19 12.39 22.26 17.89 23.15
7 Weight of Dry soil in grams 62.46 79.51 129.82 93.89 111.70
8 Water Content w=6/7*100 13.11 15.58 17.15 19.05 20.73
9 Bulk Density 1.91 2.05 2.08 2.04 2.00
10 Dry Density 1.69 1.77 1.78 1.71 1.66
Table-5 Standard Proctor Compaction Test Observables

Graph-4 Standard Proctor Compaction Test

1.80

1.78

1.76
DRY DENSITY

1.74

1.72

1.70

1.68

1.66
10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 17.00 18.00 19.00 20.00 21.00 22.00
WATER CONTENT

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[150]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7
The weight of the Mould: 4260 grams
The volume of the Mould: 1000 cc
𝑾𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒘𝒆𝒕 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝑩𝒖𝒍𝒌 𝑫𝒆𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒕𝒚
Where., Bulk Density= , Dry Density=
𝑽𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒎𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑴𝒐𝒖𝒍𝒅 𝟏+𝑾𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒏𝒕
From Graph:
OMC: 16.65
MDD: 1.784

5) California Bearing Ratio Test

I. Without geogrid II. With geogrid @ H/4 distance from the bottom

Graph-5 CBR Test Graph-6 CBR Test

16.0 16.0
14.0 14.0
12.0 12.0
10.0 10.0

Load ( KN)
Load ( KN)

8.0 8.0
6.0 6.0
4.0 4.0
2.0 2.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

CBR @ 2.5 mm Penetration :1.67 CBR @ 2.5 mm Penetration :1.80

CBR @ 5.0 mm Pemetration:1.36 CBR @ 5.0 mm Pemetration:1.29

III. With geogrid @ H/2 distance from the bottom IV. With geogrid @ 3H/4 distance from the bottom

Graph-7 CBR Test Graph-8 CBR Test

16.0 16.0
14.0 14.0
12.0 12.0
10.0 10.0
Load ( KN)
Load ( KN)

8.0 8.0
6.0 6.0
4.0 4.0
2.0 2.0

0.0 0.0
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

CBR @ 2.5 mm Penetration :2.50 CBR @ 2.5 mm Penetration :3.91

CBR @ 5.0 mm Pemetration:2.74 CBR @ 5.0 mm Pemetration:1.80

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[151]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7
Description CBR Value
Without geogrid 1.67
With geogrid @ H/4 from bottom 1.80
With geogrid @H/2 from bottom 2.50
With geogrid @ 3H/4 from bottom 3.91
Table -6 CBR Value Variation with Geogrid Application in Soil Sample

Graph-9 CBR Contrast with geogrid Application

4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
CBR Values

2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Without geogrid With geogrid @ H/4 from With geogrid @H/2 from With geogrid @ 3H/4 from
bottom bottom bottom
Description

VII. DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT as per (IRC: 37-2012)

Bituminous Surfacing with Granular Base and Granular Sub-base:

Fig-7 Bituminous Surfacing with Granular Base and Granular Sub-base

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[152]
 ISSN: 2277-9655
[Yadav * et al., 7(4): April, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164
IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7
IRC: 37-2012

Graph-10: Plate-2 (IRC:37-2012) Pavement Design Catalogues

WITHOUT GEOGRID: CBR: 1.67 %, N: 47.45 msa ≈ 50 msa
i.e., not fit for laying a road directly on the Subgrade soil; which needs Stabilization to it.
WITH GEOGRID AT 3H/4 FROM BOTTOM: CBR: 3.91 %, N: 47.45 msa ≈ 50 msa
i.e., thickness of GSB: 300 mm, G. Base:250, DBM: 115 mm, BC/SDBC:40mm

The thickness of pavement required in MM:

Thickness Without grid With Geogrid @ H/4 from bottom

GSB NA 300
G.BASE NA 250
DBM NA 115
BC NA 40
Total Pavement thickness Stabilization required 705
Table-7 Thickness of Pavement in mm contrast with the application of geogrid
VIII. CONCLUSION
The positive effects of geogrid reinforced subgrade courses can economically and ecologically be utilized to
reduce aggregate thickness. And it can also increase the life of the pavement and can also decrease the overall
cost of the pavement construction with an increased lifetime.

IX. REFERENCES
[1] IRC:37-2012 Guidelines for DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
[2] Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering By DR.K.R. ARORA
[3] Rankilor, P. R., Membranes in Ground Engineering, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1981.
[4] I.S: 2720 (Part – XVI), 1979: Indian Standard Methods of test for Soils, Laboratory Determination of
CBR.
[5] Mehndiratta H.C (1993) Chandra Satish, Sirsh Virendra “Correlations amongst strength parameters of
soil reinforced with geotextile” HRB No 49, Indian Roads Congress, 13-24.

CITE AN ARTICLE
Ganesh Yadav, P., Bharath, S., & Kumar, M. M. (n.d.). USAGE OF GEOGRIDS IN FLEXIBLE
PAVEMENT DESIGN. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING SCIENCES &
RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY, 7(4), 144-155.

http: // www.ijesrt.com© International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

[153]