English  |
| Quantity: | |
|---|---|
Lianyi or OEM
HDPE ,PP ,PET ,Fiberglass etc
these. A secondary function is aggregate fill/subgrade separation.
The benefits of geogrids in unpaved low-volume roads have been shown in numerous
laboratory and full-scale experiments (e.g., Haas et al., 1988; Webster, 1993; Collin et al.,
1996; Fannin and Sigurdsson, 1996; Knapton and Austin, 1996; Gabr et al., 2001; and, Leng
and Gabr, 2002). Some experimental programs investigated the performance of different
geogrids (extruded, woven or welded) and the results showed that the stiffer geogrids
performed better (Webster, 1993; Collin et al., 1996). These experiments served as a basis
for the development of the empirical design methods for geogrid-reinforced unpaved low-
volume roads.
Historically the geogrids were introduced to the market in the early 1980s and by that time
geotextiles were used at the base-subgrade interface for separation, filtration and some
reinforcement. As a result, the first empirical design procedures of Barenberg et al. (1975)
and Steward et al. (1977) were developed for geotextiles-reinforced unpaved roads using
solutions based on the limit equilibrium bearing capacity theory. The solution of Steward et
al. (1977) was modified by Tingle and Webster (2003) for geogrid reinforcement and the
proposed modification was adopted in the COE method for design of geotextile- and geogrid-
reinforced unpaved roads (USCOE, 2003). This approach is described in Section 6-1.
Utilizing previous research, Giroud and Han (2004) developed a theoretically based and
experimentally calibrated design method for geogrid-reinforced unpaved roads that reflects
the improvements due to the geogrid-aggregate interlock. The method can also be utilized
for analysis of unreinforced and geogrid-reinforced unpaved roads, or temporary platforms.
This approach will be presented in Section 6-2.
· Reduces amount of aggregate needed= construction cost savings.
· Reduces soil excavation and backfilling= construction cost savings.
· Minimizes differential settlement and prevents upward movement of the subgrade = higher structural performance.
· Improves overall structural life= maintenance cost savings.
these. A secondary function is aggregate fill/subgrade separation.
The benefits of geogrids in unpaved low-volume roads have been shown in numerous
laboratory and full-scale experiments (e.g., Haas et al., 1988; Webster, 1993; Collin et al.,
1996; Fannin and Sigurdsson, 1996; Knapton and Austin, 1996; Gabr et al., 2001; and, Leng
and Gabr, 2002). Some experimental programs investigated the performance of different
geogrids (extruded, woven or welded) and the results showed that the stiffer geogrids
performed better (Webster, 1993; Collin et al., 1996). These experiments served as a basis
for the development of the empirical design methods for geogrid-reinforced unpaved low-
volume roads.
Historically the geogrids were introduced to the market in the early 1980s and by that time
geotextiles were used at the base-subgrade interface for separation, filtration and some
reinforcement. As a result, the first empirical design procedures of Barenberg et al. (1975)
and Steward et al. (1977) were developed for geotextiles-reinforced unpaved roads using
solutions based on the limit equilibrium bearing capacity theory. The solution of Steward et
al. (1977) was modified by Tingle and Webster (2003) for geogrid reinforcement and the
proposed modification was adopted in the COE method for design of geotextile- and geogrid-
reinforced unpaved roads (USCOE, 2003). This approach is described in Section 6-1.
Utilizing previous research, Giroud and Han (2004) developed a theoretically based and
experimentally calibrated design method for geogrid-reinforced unpaved roads that reflects
the improvements due to the geogrid-aggregate interlock. The method can also be utilized
for analysis of unreinforced and geogrid-reinforced unpaved roads, or temporary platforms.
This approach will be presented in Section 6-2.
· Reduces amount of aggregate needed= construction cost savings.
· Reduces soil excavation and backfilling= construction cost savings.
· Minimizes differential settlement and prevents upward movement of the subgrade = higher structural performance.
· Improves overall structural life= maintenance cost savings.