Effect of Granular Layer Strength and Thickness on Jute Geotextiles Reinforced Rural Road

  • Souvik Patra
  • Ashis Kumar BeraEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 29)


In the present study, a 3D finite element (FE) analysis has been carried out to study the stress and strain response of Jute Geotextiles (JGT) reinforced rural road by static analysis. In the rural road, JGT has been placed in between top granular layer and subgrade soil with a thin layer of sand above and below of JGT as Sand-JGT-Sand (SJS) reinforcement. SJS reinforced rural road has been modelled and analysed by using the commercial FE software package ABAQUS 6.12. Two types of reinforced rural road section have been developed to simulate the effect of degradation of JGT. Nonlinear behaviour of the road materials has been taken into account for top granular layer, sand and for subgrade soil, JGT has been discretized using membrane element. Results of FE analysis indicate a significant improvement in the service life of SJS reinforced rural road section, before and after degradation of JGT over unreinforced rural road section. Only a small fraction of the tensile strength of JGT has been mobilized in SJS reinforced rural road sections. Maximum percentage utilization of JGT tensile strength has been found as 4.76 and 2.38% for thin and thick top granular layer, respectively.


FE analysis Rural road Jute geotextiles Service life Tensile strength 


  1. Abu-Farsakh MY, Gu J, Voyiadjis GZ, Chen Q (2014) Mechanistic–empirical analysis of the results of finite element analysis on flexible pavement with geogrid base reinforcement. Int J Pavement Eng 15(9):786–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Society for Testing and Materials (2001) ASTM D4595: 2001. Standard test method for tensile properties of geotextiles by the wide-width strip methodGoogle Scholar
  3. Basu G, Roy AN, Bhattacharyya SK, Ghosh SK (2009) Construction of unpaved rural road using jute–synthetic blended woven geotextile—a case study. Geotext Geomembr 27(6):506–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bhandari A, Han J (2010) Investigation of geotextile-soil interaction under a cyclic vertical load using the discrete element method. Geotext Geomembr 28(1):33–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chandra S, Viladkar MN, Nagrale PP (2008) Mechanistic approach for fiber-reinforced flexible pavements. J. Transp Eng 134(1):15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cho YH, McCullough B, Weissmann J (1996) Considerations on finite-element method application in pavement structural analysis. Transp Res Record J Transp Res Board 1539:96–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Giroud JP, Han J (2004) Design method for geogrid-reinforced unpaved roads. I. Development of design method. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 130(8):775–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gupta A, Kumar P, Rastogi R (2014) Mechanistic–empirical approach for design of low volume pavements. Int J Pavement Eng 16(9):797–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gupta A, Kumar P, Rastogi R (2015) Critical pavement response analysis of low-volume pavements considering nonlinear behavior of materials. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2474:3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hibbitt D, Karlsson B, Sorensen P (2012) ABAQUS user’s manual: 2012. Dassault Systèmes Simulia CorpGoogle Scholar
  11. Hufenus R, Rueegger R, Banjac R, Mayor P, Springman SM, Brönnimann R (2006) Full-scale field tests on geosynthetic reinforced unpaved roads on soft subgrade. Geotext Geomembr 24(1):21–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Indian Road Congress 37 (2012) Guidelines for the design of flexible pavements. New Delhi, India, pp 370–380Google Scholar
  13. IRC SP 20: 2002 Indian Road Congress (2002) Manual for route location, design, construction and maintenance of rural roads. New Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  14. IRC SP:72 (2015) Guidelines for the design of flexible pavements for low volume road. Indian Road Congress, New Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  15. Khan AJ, Huq F, Hossain SZ (2014) Application of jute geotextiles for rural road pavement construction. Ground Improv Geosynthetics 370–379Google Scholar
  16. Kuo CM, Chou FJ (2004) Development of 3‐D finite element model for flexible pavements. J Chin Inst Eng 27(5):707–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Midha VK, Joshi S, Kumar SS (2017) Performance of chemically treated jute geotextile in unpaved roads at different in situ conditions. J Inst Eng (India) Ser E 1–8Google Scholar
  18. Patra S, Bera AK (2016) Field and numerical investigation on time dependent behaviour of jute geotextile (JGT) reinforced rural road. In: Indian geotechnical conference, Chennai, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  19. Patra S, Bera AK (2017) Time dependent field CBR and its regression model. Int J Civil Eng Technol 8(1):82–88Google Scholar
  20. Perkins SW, Christopher BR, Lacina BA, Klompmaker J (2012) Mechanistic-empirical modeling of geosynthetic-reinforced unpaved roads. Int J Geomech 12(4):370–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Qiu Y, Dennis N, Elliott R (2000) Design criteria for permanent deformation of subgrade soils in flexible pavements for low-volume roads. Soils Found 40(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramaswami S, Aziz M (1989) Jute geotextile for roads. In: International workshops on geotextile, India, pp 137–143Google Scholar
  23. Saha P, Roy D, Manna S, Adhikari B, Sen R, Roy S (2012) Durability of transesterified jute geotextiles. Geotext Geomembr 35:69–75. Scholar
  24. Taherkhani H, Jalali M (2017) Investigating the performance of geosynthetic-reinforced asphaltic pavement under various axle loads using finite-element method. Road Mater Pavement Des 18(5):1200–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Engineering Science and TechnologyShibpur, HowrahIndia

Personalised recommendations