COMPOSITE PAVEMENT SYSTEMS:
SYNTHESIS OF DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES
FINAL
CONTRACT REPORT
VTRC 09-CR2
http://www.virginiadot.org/vtrc/main/online_reports/pdf/09-cr2.pdf
GERARDO W. FLINTSCH, Ph.D., P.E.
Director
Center for Safe and Sustainable Infrastructure
Virginia Tech Transportation Institute
BRIAN K. DIEFENDERFER, Ph.D., P.E.
Research Scientist
Virginia Transportation Research Council
ORLANDO NUNEZ
Graduate Research Assistant
Center for Safe and Sustainable Infrastructure
Virginia Tech Transportation Institute
Standard Title Page - Report on Federally Funded Project
1. Report No.:
2. Government Accession No.:
3. Recipient’s Catalog No.:
FHWA/VTRC 09-CR2
4. Title and Subtitle:
5. Report Date:
November 2008
6. Performing Organization Code:
Composite Pavement Systems: Synthesis of Design and Construction Practices
7. Author(s):
Gerardo W. Flintsch, Ph.D., P.E., Brian K. Diefenderfer, Ph.D., P.E., and Orlando
Nunez
8. Performing Organization Report No.:
VTRC 09-CR2
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS):
11. Contract or Grant No.:
9. Performing Organization and Address:
Virginia Tech Transportation Institute
3500 Transportation Research Plaza
Blacksburg, VA 24061
85414
12. Sponsoring Agencies’ Name and Address:
13. Type of Report and Period Covered:
Final Contract
14. Sponsoring Agency Code:
Virginia Department of Transportation
1401 E. Broad Street
Richmond, VA 23219
Federal Highway Administration
400 North 8th Street, Room 750
Richmond, VA 23219-4825
15. Supplementary Notes:
16. Abstract:
Composite pavement systems have shown the potential for becoming a cost-effective pavement alternative for highways
with high and heavy traffic volumes, especially in Europe. This study investigated the design and performance of composite
pavement structures composed of a flexible layer (top-most layer) over a rigid base. The report compiles (1) a literature review
of composite pavement systems in the U.S. and worldwide; (2) an evaluation of the state-of-the-practice in the U.S. obtained
using a survey; (3) an investigation of technical aspects of various alternative composite pavement systems designed using
available methodologies and mechanistic-empirical pavement distress models (fatigue, rutting, and reflective cracking); and (4) a
preliminary life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) to study the feasibility of the most promising composite pavement systems.
Composite pavements, when compared to traditional flexible or rigid pavements, have the potential to become a cost-
effective alternative because they may provide
better levels of performance, both structurally and functionally, than the
traditional flexible and rigid pavement designs. Therefore, they can be viable options for high volume traffic corridors.
Countries, such as the U.K. and Spain, which have used composite pavement systems in their main road networks, have reported
positive experiences in terms of functional and structural performance. Composite pavement structures can provide long-life
pavements that offer good serviceability levels and rapid, cost-effective maintenance operations, which are highly desired,
especially for high-volume, high-priority corridors.
Composite pavements mitigate various structural and functional problems that typical flexible or rigid pavements tend to
present, such as hot-mix asphalt (HMA) fatigue cracking, subgrade rutting, portland cement concrete (PCC) erosion, and PCC
loss of friction, among others. At the same time, though, composite systems are potentially more prone to other distresses, such
as reflective cracking and rutting within the HMA layer. Premium HMA surfaces and/or reflective cracking mitigation
techniques may be required to mitigate these potential problems.
At the economic level, the results of the deterministic agency-cost LCCA suggest that the use of a composite pavement
with a cement-treated base (CTB) results in a cost-effective alternative for a typical interstate traffic scenario. Alternatively, a
composite pavement with a continuously reinforced concrete pavement (CRCP) base may become more cost-effective for very
high volumes of traffic. Further, in addition to savings in agency cost, road user cost savings could also be important, especially
for the HMA over CRCP composite pavement option because it would not require any lengthy rehabilitation actions, as is the
case for the typical flexible and rigid pavements.
17 Key Words:
18. Distribution Statement:
composite pavement, pavement type selection, semi-rigid
pavement, mechanistic evaluation
No restrictions. This document is available to the public
through NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161.
19. Security Classif. (of this report):
20. Security Classif. (of this page):
21. No. of Pages:
22. Price:
Unclassified
Unclassified
58
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized