RSTA Geosynthetics and Steel Meshes Co Jan 2012

RSTA Code of Practice for Geosynthetics and Steel Meshes
(for Inhibiting Cracking in Bituminous Bound Layers)
CODE OF PRACTICE FOR

GEOSYNTHETICS AND STEEL MESHES
January 2012 1
Foreword
This first edition of the Code of Practice has been produced by the Road Surface
Treatments Association (RSTA) Geosynthetics & Steel Meshes Committee to provide
highway authorities, designers and principal contractors a thorough understanding of
Geosynthetics and Steel Meshes, their use, laying techniques and applications.
Reference has been made to BS EN 15381:2008 Geotextiles and Geotextile Related

Products – characteristics required for use in pavements and asphalt overlays. This EN
sets the standard for manufacturers to produce Geosynthetics with CE marking.
The document references the work of the COST ACTION 348 group on Reinforcement of
Pavements with Steel Meshes and Geosynthetics - this work included design modelling
and design procedures.
This edition has been written and may be used with reference to the ADEPT document
“Guidance on the use of paving fabrics and grids as asphalt reinforcement”. This edition
also anticipates the following publication; Interim Advice Note Highway Agency - „The
Approval Process for the Use of Geosynthetics in Pavements to Control Reflective
Cracking‟.
This document has been peer reviewed by ADEPT Soils, Materials, Design and
Specifications Committee.
The information contained herein is intended to represent industry best practice. No

liability is accepted by RSTA for any damages caused to property or personal injury
resulting from using the guidance contained within this document.
January 2012 2
CONTENTS Page
1 Introduction & overview 4
2 Geosynthetic & steel mesh materials 7

a. Types
b. Quality assurance
c. COSHH
3 Site conditions and assessment 9
a. Existing site condition and history
b. Determine required performance and limitations
c. Reflective cracking failure modes
d. System selection
e. Design
4 Installation 18
a. Selection of appropriate installation contractor
b. Planning the execution of the work
c. Site preparation
d. Bond coat and application
e. Geosynthetic installation
f. Steel mesh installation
g. Overlay application
h. Training
i. Traffic management
j. Health and Safety
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 24
Appendix A - Glossary of terms

Appendix B - Reference Documents
Appendix C - Construction Quality Control Testing
Appendix D - Reference Projects
Appendix E - Installation Photographs
Appendix F - Committee members
January 2012 3
1. INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW
Cracking in asphalt pavements is now recognised as one of the biggest problems

faced by highway maintenance engineers. Geosynthetics and steel meshes, also
known as interlayers, are a proven approach for extending the life of pavements.
When placed between bituminous bound layers these products retard the initiation
and propagation of reflective cracking which leads to premature pavement failure.
These systems have a long track record of successful use with over 5 million m2
used in the UK and more than 100 million m2 installed throughout Europe since the
1980‟s.Over this period the industry has continuously improved its products, systems
and installation techniques and captured evidence of performance. It is worth noting
that the majority of UK local authorities have now used these systems as they have
grown in acceptance.
This first edition of the Code of Practice (CoP) has been produced by manufacturers
and installers to provide highway authorities, designers and principal contractors
with essential guidance on the use of geosynthetics and steel meshes, their use,
laying techniques and applications.
For clarity this document is solely concerned with addressing pavement defects
caused by reflective cracking. Failures and degradation resulting from the following
circumstances are not addressed:
- Asphalt deterioration
- Sub-grade failure and associated rutting
- Asphalt rutting associated with permanent asphalt strain
The maintenance of roads in the UK has always been a challenge due to heavy
trafficking and variable weather conditions. Many types of treatments at, or below,
the surface of an asphalt road have been used to extend the lifetime of the road with
a view to minimising maintenance costs. Breakdown of the road surface is caused
by weathering, movement and fatigue, accelerated by the asphalt‟s susceptibility to
reflective cracking leading to ingress of water, then to potholes and a finally, total
breakdown of the surface.
One of the treatments which has been used extensively over the past 25 years in the
UK and throughout Europe is the use of an interlayer which is installed within the
January 2012 4
pavement to intercept the path of a crack propagating through the pavement. These
interlayers are usually supplied as a rolled product in grid form (polymer, glass &
steel mesh), non woven geotextile (polymer & glass) or a composite and non woven
(both glass & polymer). This approach has resulted in significant whole life cost
savings through reduced maintenance, a number of ADEPT members have
confirmed this to be their experience.
A useful way of comparing the effectiveness of these systems is to express

performance in terms of a „cost life index‟. This is the cost per square metre of the
work divided by the service life in years. It provides a measure of „value for money‟
which the highway authority is achieving. A low „cost life index‟ and high „value for
money‟ result from specifying high-quality materials and workmanship.
Benefits include:
 Maintenance cost reduction.
 Significant extension of road life over conventional surfacing.
 Reduction in asphalt thickness, in some circumstances, saving on material
costs
 Reduced environmental impact associated with longer maintenance intervals
 Reduced hidden costs to businesses and the general public through delays
caused by road closure and traffic restrictions
These benefits have steadily driven increased utilisation of these products over
recent years.
Bituminous bound layers crack in-situ because of their inability to withstand strain,
shear and tensile stresses created by a number of factors resulting in one or more of
the following outcomes.
 Reflective cracking
 Fatigue cracking
 Differential settlement (often prevalent in road widening schemes)
 Thermal cracking
Carriage Way treated with

asphalt reinforcement Carriage way treated with
asphalt reinforcement
Parking Area
untreated
Crack visible
Crack Stopped by the
asphalt reinforcement
Parking area
untreated
Photo taken in 2008, 5 years after installation Close up area showing prevention of cracking
The effectiveness and performance of the geosynthetic or steel mesh system is

highly dependent on site specific circumstances. The majority of UK pavements
January 2012 5
have evolved over time and were not originally designed to withstand the weight and
increasing traffic volume of commercial vehicles. It has taken many years of careful
monitoring to establish the performance of these systems after accounting for the
many variables that can influence pavement deterioration, and this work continues.
To obtain the best performance it is necessary to consider a range of variables and

based on these carefully select the correct geosynthetic or steel mesh system.
Research over the years has addressed and isolated these variables, either through
laboratory or site trials and this work has been supplemented via extensive practical
experience gained from many thousands of successful installations.
The main functions that have been identified are:

 Reinforcement at low strain – the ability of the material to bind the asphaltic
layer together to resist crack propagation in either direction, spanning the
potential crack.
 Stress absorption – the ability of the material to absorb transient stress in all
directions
 Sealing - prevention of water penetration into lower layers and the avoidance
of associated problems due to freeze/thaw effects and the need for lower
drainage to remove subsurface water; potential reduction of oxidation of lower
bitumen layers.
One key lesson learned and, often overlooked in the past, is that correct installation
of these materials is an absolute necessity. It is imperative that geosynthetics and
steel meshes are installed correctly and efficiently to maximise long term
performance against reflective cracking. Improvements have been made to the
efficiency of the installation by using trained operatives and the correct laying
equipment generally resulting in little or no delays to the road surfacing installation.
This guide has an extensive section on installation techniques to ensure the
optimum performance of the selected system.
The type of damage mechanism causing the cracks to appear at the pavement
surface depends on the properties and nature of the pavement structure (e.g.
thickness, stiffness etc), the properties of the underlying soil, the traffic
characteristics, the climatic conditions and also whether it is new construction or
maintenance in the form of relatively thin asphaltic overlays. In the latter case the
severity of cracking in the existing pavement structure plays an important role.
A wide range of possible solutions for reflective cracking exist: mill and fill (and
overlay), application of thick asphaltic overlays, the use of modified asphaltic
mixtures (e.g. with high bitumen content, polymer modified bitumen or composed in
such a way that a porous nature is created), the application of an interlayer for
stress-absorption or reinforcement systems. Combinations of these solutions are of
course also possible. During the design phase of a project, each potential solution
needs to be assessed in terms of cost and benefit to life expectancy before deciding
on the most appropriate maintenance option.
Manufacturers have responded to the variations in road type, failure mode and the
need for efficient installations by modifying their products and systems to suit.
January 2012 6
Key product types available are listed below:
 Steel meshes
 Glass grids (may be coated with polymer or bitumen)
 Polymer grids
 Composites (combining polymer or glass grids and non woven textiles)
 Non-woven textiles
A wide range of techniques have been successfully utilised over many years
involving different constituent materials, installation practices and design
methodologies as illustrated by this CoP.
This document aims to guide and inform designers and end users on the range of
products and applications that are available so they are able to make informed
project related decisions. It identifies the important aspects for the use, design and
correct installation of geosynthetics and steel meshes in bound pavement layers.
2. GEOSYNTHETIC AND STEEL MESH MATERIALS
a) Types
Geosynthetics and steel mesh products are available in a variety of forms (grids,
textiles, composites etc.), and are manufactured from different base materials (glass,
polymers, and steel). The following material types are commonly used.
Steel meshes typically galvanised steel wire, double twisted to form a mesh with
reinforcing bars at intervals.
Glass grids typically knitted and may be coated with polymer or bitumen or a
combination. Some of these materials have self adhesive backing.
January 2012 7
Polymer grids typically punched and stretched polypropylene or knitted/woven

polyester. Other polymers are also available but less prevalent.
Composites typically a combination of polymer or glass grids and non-woven

textiles combined by lamination or stitching.
Non-woven fabrics typically needle punched polypropylene but polyester and

combination using glass fibres are also available.
January 2012 8
Geosynthetics and steel meshes must be compatible with the asphalt to ensure the
integrity of the system. They must be stable and durable both to withstand the rigors
of the paving operation and provide functionality for the desired design life.
b) Quality Assurance
All the materials listed in 2 a) above should be manufactured under quality controlled
conditions and should be CE marked in accordance with BS EN 15381:2008
(specific product details may be obtained directly from the relevant manufacturers).
Quality assurance of any product used is required to ensure a high standard of
installed, long term, product performance. The RSTA Geosynthetics and Steel
Meshes Sector members (see Appendix D) are fully committed to the utilisation of
quality manufactured products and must operate quality management systems in
accordance with the requirements of BS EN ISO 9001 (2008).
c) Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH)
All materials utilised must comply with COSHH Regulations 2002. Installation
contractors must be provided with COSHH datasheets relating to the hazards to
health represented by the use of materials or equipment.
3. SITE CONDITIONS AND ASSESSMENT
a) Existing Site Condition and History
Before a geosynthetic or steel mesh solution can be proposed every project should
be carefully assessed and, in particular, information should be collected on a range
of site specific conditions. It may be the case that issues exist that require other
forms of treatment prior, or in preference, to geosynthetics or steel mesh.
As indicated above, it must be remembered that roads have, in many cases, evolved
rather than been designed and there are many differing related pavement
construction types and failure mechanisms. It is therefore important to make careful
observations and measure existing site conditions to help assess the potential failure
mechanism so the most appropriate solution can be recommended.
As a general consideration associated with all pavement construction, water plays a

significant role in carriageway deterioration. Water table and drainage issues must
be identified and dealt with prior to pavement remedial works to prevent premature
failures. Roads built through cuttings in rural areas are particularly susceptible to
drainage problems. Any site should be examined for signs of upward pumping of
groundwater or excessive movement and structural instability. If the pavement is
structurally unstable or hydraulically compromised, the designer should first address
the structural and groundwater issues before the solution to any remaining reflective
cracking problem can be considered.
In order to make a fully informed evaluation of a reflective cracking problem there

are number of key pieces of information which must be collected or recorded.
January 2012 9
Information on surface cracking should be recorded as follows*:
 Number and length of cracks greater than 5 mm with spalling and bifurcation
 Number and length of cracks less than 5mm wide
 Location of cracks (e.g. only in wheel tracks or over the entire road surface)
 Photographs are obviously very useful (e.g. 1m from road surface)
*(Guidance in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 7, Section 3, Part
3, HD 30/08 Pavement Maintenance Procedure may also be helpful).
Other information required on the existing conditions and history includes:
 Traffic characteristics (number, type of vehicles, speed)

 Type and details of existing road construction
 Location of service trenches
 If relevant, the temperature variations in time (day, night, season)
 Pavement and soil properties
 Drainage and groundwater information (see above)
During the site survey care should be taken to observe not only the failed
carriageway but tell tale signs in other areas. For example linear cracking may not
be reflective cracking but may be due to service pipe failure or settlement due to
previous road widening.
In addition to the information above a falling weight deflectometer could be

employed to determine the effective modulus of the existing pavement, although
care should be taken with the interpretation of these results.
As indicated above it is important to have an understanding of the type of existing

road construction as this may give valuable clues about the potential failure
mechanism.
Flexible Composite Pavements
Flexible composite pavements often display reflective cracking from construction

joints. Such pavements are constructed in differing forms, with some internally
reinforced with steel mesh, some incorporating connecting dowel bars and others
with no reinforcement at all. Most flexible composite road bases will have been
installed with expansion joints which commonly initiate cracking in flexible overlay
materials. Another common problem associated with these pavements is
settlement of the underlying slabs resulting in the formation of voids, which can lead
to rocking movement and/or some slabs fracturing under the stress. Significant
vertical shear movement must be alleviated prior to installation of any geosynthetic
or steel mesh material or early failures will occur.
Pavement Quality Concrete/Cement Bound Materials/Lean Mix Road Base
Roads constructed using a lean mix road base display reflective cracking in a similar
manner to composite roads, although the material is not jointed, reinforced or
January 2012 10
dowelled. Lean mix roads may suffer with some slabs fracturing into irregular slabs
and acting independently from the rest of the carriageway.
Flexible Pavements
Flexible pavements can fail for a number of reasons, it is critical that the correct
mode of failure is identified so that appropriate remedial action can be taken.
Flexible pavements with weak foundations often display alligator cracking in
patches. Ruts can be present in conjunction with areas of alligator cracking where
carriageways have sub-standard bearing capacity for imposed traffic loadings. Many
rural carriageways also display edge deterioration mainly caused by over-run.
Sett Paved Carriageways
In many areas of the UK older roads were originally constructed using setts
(cobbles) which have been subsequently overlaid with bituminous materials. The
presence of setts can lead to de-lamination and cracking of overlay materials. Care
must be taken to ensure that setts are stable.
Reflective cracking from concrete bays Reflective cracking from thermal movement
Reflective cracking from expansion joints Cracking from utility trench
Surfacing failure caused by underlying setts Alligator cracking due to structural failure
January 2012 11
b) Determine Required Performance and Limitations
Clearly in addition to the existing conditions the choice of solution will be influenced
by practical and future limitations, performance requirements and expectations. The
following points should be considered:
 The required life of the solution. For example the acceptable level of crack
over a specific time table (say 10% of the original cracking in 10 years)
 The presumed life of any alternative solution. For example plane & overlay
with no geosynthetic or steel mesh
 Any practical limitations on overlay thickness ( ironwork, kerb lines, drainage
etc)
 If installation is to take place on a planed surface, the proposed coarseness of
the milled or planed surface will be required as may influence choice of
solution.
 Details of any other planned works which will impinge on, or compromise the
chosen solution
 Details of any likely changes in traffic characteristics with time.
 Any limitations on carriageway possessions in terms of time or space.
Furthermore, it is considered desirable that parameters which give an indication

about road user costs and driving comfort are provided as part of the output.
c) Reflective Cracking Failure Modes
Reflective cracking generally results from one of three types of pavement

movement, bending, shear or thermal.
BENDING
Bending: This mode of failure is relatively common and is well understood. It has
been simply recreated via several laboratory models to test a range of materials. A
typical model for this type of test is illustrated below using a geosynthetics interlayer.
. (Note: the asphalt has been painted white to facilitate crack detection)
January 2012 12
Unreinforced = 425,000 cycles = significant crack
Reinforced = 1,090,000 cycles = no open crack
SHEAR
January 2012 13
Shear: This is generally accepted to be the most difficult mode of failure to

accommodate and if significant vertical shear movements (> several mm) are
present then geosynthetics and steel meshes are unlikely to prevent reflective
cracking for any length of time. It is generally recommended that other remedial
works are undertaken in order to remove/reduce the shear movements prior to
treatment. This is also a very difficult mode of failure to model successfully in the
laboratory although some modelling has been undertaken.
THERMAL
Thermal: This mode of cracking is not as prevalent in the UK as some other

countries but has been noted. This is a failure mechanism that can be treated
successfully with a range of solutions although as movements can be cyclic,
consideration should be given to the type of geosynthetic or steel mesh employed.
Thermal, in-line, movement is relatively simple to model in the laboratory as
indicated below.
January 2012 14
d) System Selection
As indicated in Section 2) above there are many types of geosynthetics and steel
meshes in use and there are also many ways in which to categorise these materials
but in terms of design philosophy related to reflective cracking they tend to be split
as follows:
 Those which permit intimate contact between the overlay and the underlying
asphalt or concrete and rely on reinforcing the upper layer to inhibit crack
propagation
 Those which provide a change in horizontal stiffness between pavement layers
thus reducing stress transfer between upper and lower layers. This is often
known as the SAMI effect (Stress Absorbing Membrane Interlayer)
 Those which, via the use of composite materials, provide both of the above
beneficial effects
It is of note that success has been achieved with all three of the above methods and
associated materials and given the complex nature and particular importance of site
specific information, it is therefore strongly recommended that the advice of
individual manufacturers and installers is sought regarding the suitability of their
products and systems to particular project conditions.
However, by way of assistance in this regard, and in addition to the information

requested in sections 3a and 3b above, it is suggested that the proposer of a
geosynthetic or steel mesh solution should be asked the following questions:
 What is the mode of failure and cracking mechanism prevalent at the site and
how will the proposed solution address this?
 What are the required mechanical and durability characteristics of the
geosynthetic or steel mesh and how are these to be specified? Any
specifications should generally conform to accepted (European) format,
where the minimum level of product description is according to international
standards (e.g. CEN, ISO).
 How does the geosynthetic or steel mesh interact with surrounding asphalt
mixtures in order for the system to function, including details of any
mechanism of stress relief required (SAMI)?
 How has the performance of the particular geosynthetic or steel mesh system
been validated? (e.g. long term usage, monitoring field data, laboratory
research)
 What is the whole life cost benefit of the utilisation of the system for the project
in question?
 How will the geosynthetic or steel mesh be removed at the end of its working
life and what are the recycling characteristics of the system?
 What are the particular installation requirements associated with the proposed
system? (e.g. regulating layer, minimum overlay thickness, particular type
and quantity of tack coat etc) See section 4.
January 2012 15
The flow chart below is intended to help the designer with the system selection
process:
New construction
Glass fibre composite

Polymer composite
New Yes
construction or
Is a waterproofing function
overlay ?
required.?
Rolled/ smooth
surface/ regulating No
layer
Glass fibre grid
Overlay Polymer grid
Steel mesh
Planed/ rough Roughness/ striations <

surface 10mm
Roughness/ striations > Steel mesh

10mm Glass fibre composite
Polymer composite
e) Design
As indicated above, due to the large number of geosynthetics and steel meshes
available, with their individual properties, there is not a universally agreed design
method available to the industry at this time. However a small number of
manufacturers and associated designers have developed bespoke design packages
which are available on request. For assistance in this regard please consult with
RSTA member organisations. The following design input sheet may be of
assistance with design input parameters or generally in the process of system
selection.
January 2012 16
January 2012 17
4. INSTALLATION
The planning and organisation to address health, safety and environmental issues
must commence as soon as an order is received. The Principal Contractor must
comply with the Construction Design and Management Regulations 2007 (CDM) and
therefore Principal Contractors should be encouraged to follow the advice in the
relevant approved code of practice as they have the responsibility under the new
version of the regulations for initiating the framework for safe working practices. This
will enable the Principal Contractor to plan and prepare the information and
documentation necessary to ensure the specific hazards are identified on the
various sites and the level of risk that is envisaged. This must take into account the
nature of the site, the materials to be used, the traffic management requirements
and any special health, safety and environment issues that are evident. It is the
responsibility of the installer to ensure the correct information is provided in a timely
manner to the appropriate people.
a. Selection of appropriate installation contractor
The effective use of geosynthetics and steel meshes in bound pavement layers is
well established. However, it is essential that they are installed correctly as this is
critical to their future performance. Unless the customer has extensive installation
experience of the geosynthetic or steel mesh specified, it is strongly advised that a
competent specialist contractor is employed to undertake the installation. Installation
by the asphalt surfacing contractor is not usually satisfactory because the operatives
will be unfamiliar with the process, they are unlikely to have the necessary skills or
qualifications or the correct equipment to ensure correct installation.
The performance of the geosynthetic or steel mesh is strongly influenced by the

quality of the installation hence the specialist sub-contractor must be chosen with
care. The specialist sub-contractor must be able to demonstrate that they employ
operatives with substantial experience in this work and that they will use good
quality, well maintained, purpose-made installation equipment. The specialist sub-
contractor must also operate a quality management system in accordance with BS
EN ISO 9001 and be registered with a certification body for the installation of asphalt
geosynthetics or steel Meshes. The client should ensure that the chosen contractor
is suitably experienced to install the specified geosynthetic or steel mesh.
Geosynthetic and steel mesh installers must be registered to National Highway

Sector Scheme 13 and should be members of the RSTA Geosynthetics and Steel
Meshes Sector.
b. Planning the Execution of the Work
Installation of the geosynthetic or steel mesh will usually be scheduled to take place
immediately prior to the asphalt surfacing. Generally the geosynthetic or steel mesh
should not be left exposed for extended periods. The time allowed for installation will
depend on the programme and site constraints. For example, installation over a
large unobstructed rectangular area will be rapid whereas if the site is an irregular
shape or access is poor, installation will be slower. Provided an experienced
specialist sub-contractor has been selected, installation of the product should not
January 2012 18
normally delay the surfacing works. As with all site operations, planning the
execution of the work should take place well in advance of on-site commencement.
c. Site Preparation
The preparation required will vary according to the type of geosynthetic and steel
mesh material to be installed. Textile backed geosynthetics, e.g. non woven fabrics
and composite grids, are installed onto a bituminous bond coat sprayed onto an
existing clean bituminous or concrete surface, a well planed surface without pot
holes or loose material or a newly laid bituminous surface which must have cooled to
ambient temperature. The receiving surface must be clean, dust free, relatively dry
and must be free from standing water. All potholes must be made good and any
cracks greater than 5mm wide must be sealed. Self adhesive geosynthetics should
only be laid on smooth, even surfaces and generally should be installed onto a
regulating layer, existing surface or new asphalt layer. Self adhesive grids will also
require the application of bond coat either prior or post installation and the receiving
surface must be thoroughly dry. Steel mesh can be laid onto an existing clean sound
surface, or a well planed surface without potholes or loose materials. Steel mesh
can be fixed by nailing, slurry or blinding with asphalt. It is recommended that the
individual manufacturer is contacted for project specific advice.
d. Bond Coat and Application

For geosynthetics requiring a bond coat for installation, it is vital to understand its
importance as follows:-
(1) The bond coat holds the geosynthetic in position during the asphalt paving
process.
(2) The bond coat forms a seal between the underlying surface and the overlaying
asphalt. Where a backing fabric is present, the heat and compaction of the overlying
asphalt will soften the bond coat causing it to thoroughly impregnate the fabric.
It is essential that the correct type of bond coat and the correct rate of spread are
specified and that the installer strictly adheres to these specifications.
The use of hot straight run bitumen is recommended by a number of manufacturers
because an immediate and effective fixing is achieved and therefore paving over the
geosynthetic may take place immediately reducing time on site.
Bitumen emulsions are also employed, although consideration needs to be given to
the break (curing) time required. Paving over the geosynthetic must not occur until
the emulsion has fully broken (cured). If an emulsion is used the rate of spread must
be calculated so that the quantity of residual bitumen (after evaporation of the water)
meets the specification.
The bond coat may be polymer modified and consideration should be given to the
change in properties that may result.
The bituminous bond coat must be sprayed by a calibrated binder distributor, tested
within the past twelve months for conformity to BS1707. The evenness and overall
rate of bond coat distribution should be regularly checked on site by carpet tile
testing in accordance BS EN 12272 Part 1. The binder distributor should be of
appropriate size that the bond coat can be mechanically sprayed to all except the
January 2012 19
most inaccessible of areas. Ironwork and other street furniture must be masked for
protection from bitumen spray.
e. Geosynthetic Installation
The geosynthetic should be applied by a purpose made applicator capable of laying
the fabric under tension without wrinkles or creases and brushing it firmly into the
bond coat. Rolling out the fabric by hand should be avoided except in the smallest or
most inaccessible areas. Considerable care should be exercised to avoid creases in
the laid fabric but in the event of a crease occurring this should be removed in
accordance with the manufacturer‟s installation instructions. Dependent on the type
of geosynthetic and project limitations either butt jointing or overlapping will be
recommended to ensure continuous coverage without gaps and avoid issues that
may occur from reduced overlay thickness. Where overlaps are recommended,
longitudinal overlaps should be a minimum of 50mm and transverse overlaps should
be a minimum of 100mm. Greater overlaps than the minimum are acceptable
provided that bond coat has been fully applied under the overlapping material.
At the end of a run the geosynthetic is cut with a suitable implement (e.g. sharp knife
or shears) and can similarly be cut around ironwork and removed.
A procedure for an adhesion test which may be included in the specification to
encourage the correct installation is provided as Appendix D.
Trafficking of the geosynthetic should normally be restricted to the paving machine
and delivery vehicles only. Drivers of delivery vehicles should take care to avoid
braking sharply and turning on the geosynthetic. Steel drum rollers should not run
over the geosynthetic.
f. Steel mesh installation

The steel mesh shall be unrolled with the outside of the roll facing upwards to keep
the concave curvature downwards. Various devices may be used to facilitate the
deployment operation, such as a truck or a loader. The steel mesh should be
unrolled in close proximity to the final position then if necessary be moved into the
correct position by hand. Laps should be 150mm transversely and 300mm
longitudinally and tied with wire. A staggered installation should be adopted to
prevent overlaps of 3-4 meshes in one point.
Once the rolls are in their final position, the mesh is rolled a minimum of two passes
using a pneumatic tyred roller. The roller must cover the entire width of the roll
ensuring that the steel mesh conforms to the prepared road surface. Cutting the
edge wire may facilitate the flattening of the steel mesh.
The steel mesh should be stretched to remove any curvature before being fixed: the
mesh is initially secured at one end with anchors or heavy equipment like a roller
which can be used to maintain the mesh in position. The mesh is stretched with a
hooked bar attached to a small truck or a loader. After being stretched, the mesh
shall be anchored: the first 4m of each mesh roll should be securely fastened. The
mesh is then secured with nails, slurry seal or asphalt blinding or as appropriate:
January 2012 20
Nailing
Nail the entire panel with a nailing density of 1 nail per square meter including
overlap, nailing the single wire strands, rather than the twisted sections. Nails with
PVC sleeve should be used on new asphalt.
Slurry Seal
The Steel Mesh is fixed to the pavement by a slurry seal at a rate of at least 17
kg/m2. An amount of 20-22 kg/m2 is recommended for rough surfaces. Slurry seal
must be a modified bitumen emulsion; when a minimum 17 kg/m2 is applied the
pattern of the mesh is visible through the slurry seal. After hardening of the slurry,
traffic is allowed over the mesh at a reduced speed. The slurry seal should not be
applied when the ambient temperature is < 5°C and > 30°C or on wet roads and
during rain.
Asphalt Blinding
Using a shovel, lay 10-20mm hot asphalt mix onto the road mesh in both wheel
paths in front of the paver. This is made easier if the truck is equipped with trapdoors
in the tailgate. Care should be taken to ensure that the blinding is continuous; breaks
in the blinding strips will cause the mesh to lift up under the paver. Compact the
blinding layer in the wheel tracks with a roller or rubber tyred vehicle.
For all three installation techniques the paver must not be allowed to „push‟ the
asphalt delivery truck on the mesh. The delivery truck must either unload into the
paving machine and then move away, or, must drive under its own power, just
ahead of the paving machine. Care must be taken by drivers of all vehicles on the
mesh not to make aggressive turns, stops or starts that could disturb the steel mesh.
The minimum thickness of the compacted asphalt mixture on top of the installed
mesh is 50mm. Care should be taken to ensure that the mesh does not lift up under
the paver.
g. Overlay Application
Asphalt is laid over the geosynthetic or steel mesh in the normal way subject to the
points referred to above.
It is important that the correct minimum thickness of overlay is achieved as
insufficient thickness is the principle cause of post installation issues and premature
cracking. Each geosynthetic or steel mesh material will have a required minimum
compacted thickness of overlay; manufacturer‟s recommendations should be sought
and strictly adhered to in this respect. The minimum thickness of overlay must be
achieved in a single lift rather than relying on the cumulative thickness of two or
more lifts of asphalt. When laying asphalt over steel meshes a tracked paver may be
less likely to cause rucking than a wheeled paver.
January 2012 21
SAMI Surface dressing installation methods
Surface dressing techniques have been used for many years but have been greatly
improved when a nonwoven interlayer has been included in the construction. Often
surface dressing is used on secondary roads and is a quick and cost effective
resurfacing solution to cracked and distressed pavements. Installation is similar to
the reinforcing geosynthetics where the surface is cleaned, cracks filled and unrolled
flat onto a sprayed tack coat followed by one or two layers of chippings of various
sizes. The advantage the nonwoven brings is to act as a uniform retention layer for
the tack coat preventing thinning of the bitumen. This in turn largely overcomes the
problems of loose chippings being plucked from the surface due to lack of bond. In
addition the nonwoven provides stress absorption in combination with the bitumen
layer i.e. the SAMI effect which in turn increases the life of the road surface.
h. Training
The manufacturer and the installer must demonstrate their personnel are technically
competent and provide certificates of training. All site operatives and visitors to site
must hold an appropriate CSCS card to demonstrate an understanding of Health
and Safety. Machine operators must hold CPCS or equivalent certificates to
demonstrate a level of competence.
Training requirements are embodied within the National Highway Sector Scheme 13
which stipulates the minimum training and qualification requirements for operatives
and supervisors on site. Operatives and supervisors will be required to hold NVQ for
the installation of geosynthetics and steel meshes used in bound pavement layers.
 Operatives must hold NVQ level 2 and RSTA endorsed CSCS cards.
 Supervisors must hold NVQ level 3 and RSTA endorsed CSCS cards.
Supervisors will attend the RSTA Training course on geosynthetics and steel
meshes every 5 years and obtain an RSTA Silver certificate as evidence of
maintaining competence. It is also recommended that operatives also attend the
RSTA training course every 5 years to remain up to date with industry best practice.
The RSTA can assist installation contractors in obtaining NVQ‟s and RSTA
endorsed CSCS cards for operatives and supervisors in accordance with the
requirements of National Highway Sector Scheme 13. It is the Association‟s view
that a competent qualified workforce makes a fundamental contribution to achieving
a high quality service.
Details of all training courses can be obtained from the RSTA website; www.rsta-
uk.org/calendar
i. Traffic Management
Traffic Management will be the responsibility of the Principal Contractor.
January 2012 22
j. Health & Safety
RSTA members involved in manufacturing and installing geosynthetic and steel

mesh systems take the health and safety of all their operatives and associated
personnel seriously. This concern includes others who come into contact with the
installation operation whilst in progress and until the geosynthetic or steel mesh is
overlaid.
The installer should consult the manufacturer to ensure that appropriate procedures
are followed such that the product is installed safely. In this respect it is advised that
only experienced installation contractors who have been instructed by the
manufacturer should be allowed to install the product
Under the CDM regulations it will be the duty of the Principal Contractor to prepare a
detailed health and safety plan for the installation of the works based on the pre-
construction information supplied by the installer, client, designers and CDM-
coordinator. This must itemise the methods to be employed to overcome identified
hazards and risk reduction measures that will be in force on the contract works. The
Principal Contractor must also ensure adequate welfare is provided from the start of
the contract. Once the works commence all team members must take responsibility
for the control of health, safety and environment matters.
The Principal Contractor has additional duties under other legislation to look after the
health and safety not only of his own employees but of other persons who work
alongside them and also of the passing public. Written specific risk assessments
must be prepared which can be used to identify control measures for both physical
and chemical hazards. The control measures must be incorporated in the
Contractor‟s safe system of work which should enhance the safe behaviour of the
workforce as well as protect the general public during the various stages of the
works. These measures must be communicated to all involved in the project.
Account must also be taken of environmental factors including pollution from fumes,
noise and dust etc. Disposal of waste and protection from spillage and
contamination should also be considered.
January 2012 23
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
From the work reviewed by the RSTA Committee, it can be concluded that:
 Based on over 25 years of field and laboratory experience geosynthetics and steel
meshes are proven to inhibit reflective cracking in bituminous bound pavement
layers.
 A range of effective products and systems are available providing different levels of
reinforcement, stress relief and sealing.
 Correct installation is of paramount importance to the effective performance of all
these systems.
 Observing, assimilating and recording a wide range of factors which influence the
behaviour of a road surface is key to understanding the failure mechanism and
ultimately ensuring the correct system selection.
 No single design method is universally accepted for design of pavements with
geosynthetics and steel meshes in bituminous bound layers although a number of
options exist, mainly on a bespoke product basis.
 It is strongly recommended that clients or their designers should collect the
appropriate information and contact RSTA manufacturers and installers to discuss
system options, posing the questions suggested in section 3d of this document.
The RSTA manufacturers and installers of geosynthetics and steel meshes are
committed to taking the following action;
 To maintain and when required raise standards of product installation.

 To assist BSI committee B/510/02 (Surface Treatments) in the development of
national guidance to formalise the advice available on how to use these systems.
BS434-2:2006 is to be re-written in 2012 and will cross reference this Code of
Practice. BSI Committee B/510/01 (Asphalt) is also considering cross referencing
this Code of Practice in BS594987.
 To encourage designers and clients to collect more long-term field data in a uniform
way and in sufficient detail such that it can be utilised for the validation of future
(analytical) design tools and system performance.
 To encourage clients to include control sections (without geosynthetics or steel
meshes) to permit direct comparison with the performance on treated sections.
 To encourage designers and clients to build instrumented pavements to avoid the
construction of control sections.
 To work with client bodies in the development of a universally acceptable appropriate
design methodology.
January 2012 24
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Terminology
Geosynthetic:
Product, at least one of whose components is made from a synthetic or natural
polymer, in the form of a sheet, a strip or a three dimensional structure.
Geotextile:
Planar, permeable, polymeric (synthetic or natural) textile material, which may be
nonwoven, knitted or woven.
Geotextile, nonwoven:
A geotextile in the form of a manufactured sheet, web or batt of directionally or
randomly orientated fibres, filaments or other elements, mechanically
and/or thermally and/or chemically bonded.
Geotextile, woven:
A geotextile produced by interlacing, usually at right angles, two or
more sets of yarns, fibres, filaments, tapes or other elements.
Geogrid:
Planar, polymeric structure consisting of a regular open network of integrally
connected, tensile elements, which may be linked by extrusion, bonding or
interlacing, whose openings are larger than the constituents.
Geogrid, woven:
A geogrid manufactured by weaving yarns or elements, usually at right angles to
each other.
Geocomposite:
A manufactured or assembled material using at least one geosynthetic product
among the components.
Geonet:
A planar, polymeric structure consisting of a regular dense network, whose
constituent elements are linked by knots or extrusions and whose openings are
much
larger than the constituents,
Steel meshes:
Products consisting of steel bars or wires in the shape of a grid, net, netting or fabric.
Elements connected by electro welding twisting.
Glass grid
A geogrid made of glass fibres
January 2012 25
Paving Fabric
A needle punched delaminating-free nonwoven polymeric fabric treated by heat on
one side only
Carbon fibre grid

A geogrid made of carbon fibre yarns
Adhesion
The property by means of which a geosynthetic sticks to the surface of the road and
or binder.
Binder
A liquid comprised of bitumen, either in its natural condition or modified in some way
(see Modified Binder).
Binder Distributor
A tanker fitted with a spray bar through which the binder is applied to the road
surface.
Bond
The adhesion between the binder and either the road surface or the applied
geosynthetic.
Bitumen Emulsion
Liquid product in which a substantial amount of bitumen is suspended in a finely
divided condition in an aqueous medium by means of one or more suitable
emulsifying agents.
Bitumen – Modified
A binder in which the original properties of the base binder have been altered by the
addition of “modifiers”. The most common of these are polymers. The resulting
binders are often referred to as being “polymer modified”.
Bitumen – Penetration Grade

A bitumen which complies with the requirements set out in BS EN 12591 : 1991.
Bitumen – Road
A viscous liquid, or a solid, consisting of hydrocarbons and their derivatives which
are soluble in trichloroethylene, is substantially non-volatile and softens gradually
when heated. It is black or brown in colour and possesses waterproofing and
adhesive properties. It is obtained by refinery processes from crude petroleum.
BSI
British Standards Institution
Butt Joint
A type of joint where the geosynthetic does not overlap significantly.
Boxed-In
The creation of an even start and finish of adjacent breeds.
January 2012 26
C. E. N.
European Standards Organisation.
COSHH
Control of Substances Hazardous to Health.
COSHH Assessment
An assessment relating to the hazards to health represented by the use of materials
or equipment.
Cost Life Index

The cost expressed as the cost per square metre per annum of satisfactory life.
Curtains
The canvas or other material surrounding a spray bar to minimise the gap between
the bar and the road surface.
Echelon Work
The running of two applicators one behind the other, in such a way as to produce an
Accelerated application of Geosythetics over a width equivalent to their combined
widths.
Joints
The point at which the geosynthetic is overlapped.
Mask
An adhesive tape or other similar material used to cover cat‟s eyes, road ironwork,
etc, in such a way that, after removal, they are free from binder.
Modified Binder
A binder in which the original properties of the base binder have been altered by the
addition of “modifiers”. The most common of these are polymers. The resulting
binders are often referred to as being “polymer-modified”.
NAMAS
National Measurement Accreditation Services.
NATLAS
National Testing Laboratory Accreditation Service.
Polymer
A substance formed, either naturally or artificially, from chemically simpler
substances called monomers, which are joined together by chemical (covalent)
bonds to produce very large molecules.
Pre - Patching
The remedial measures carried out to make good defective areas of surfacing in
advance of installing the geosynthetic
PTR
An abbreviation for pneumatic-tyred roller
January 2012 27
QA
An abbreviation for Quality Assurance.
Quality Assurance
A registration given to a contractor or to a product, under a scheme administered by
the Department of Trade and Industry, through its agencies.
Sector Scheme
A Quality Assurance Scheme document used in highways construction and
maintenance.
Set
A description of the state of a binder which has cooled to road temperature or, in the
case of an emulsion, has „broken‟.
Sprayer
An abbreviation for binder distributor.
Spraybar
The bar, carrying jets, that is fitted to the tanker and through which the binder is
applied to the surface.
Tanker
An abbreviation for binder distributor.
January 2012 28
APPENDIX B
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
 HD 24/06 Traffic assessment (DMRB 7.2.1).
 HD 28/04 Skidding resistance (DMRB 7.3.1).
 HD36/06Surfacing material for new and maintenance construction (DMRB 7.5.1).
 HD 37/99 Bituminous surfacing materials and techniques (DMRB 7.5.2).
Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
 Volume 1: Specification for Highway Works (MCHW 1)
www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/mchw/vol1/
 Volume 2: Notes for Guidance on the Specification for Highway Works (MCHW 2)
www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/mchw/vol2/
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION (2008). Published Document BS EN 15381 2009.

British Standards Institution, London.
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION (2000). Bitumen and bituminous binders –

Specification for paving grade bitumen. BS EN12591: 2000. British Standards Institution,
London.
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION (1989b*). Specification for hot binder distributors for
road surface dressing. BS 1707: 1989. British Standards Institution, London.
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION (2007*). Bituminous Mixtures BS EN 13108 Parts 1-4:

2007. British Standards Institution, London.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT (2001*). Safety at street works and road works – A Code
of Practice. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, Norwich.
* Current at time of publication; latest version to be used
HOUSE OF COMMONS (1974). Health and Safety at Work, etc., Act 1974. Her Majesty's
Stationery Office, London.
HOUSE OF COMMONS (1988). Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH)

Regulations 1988. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
HOUSE OF COMMONS (1991). New Roads and Street Works Act 1991. Her Majesty's
HOUSE OF COMMONS (1994). Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 1994.

Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
Dr JOHN READ & DAVID WHITEOAK (2003) The Shell Bitumen Handbook – 5th Edition.
Shell Bitumen UK, Chertsey.
January 2012 29
COST ACTION 348 reinforcement of pavements with steel meshes and geosynthetics,
symposium, Egham, Surrey, 16th March 2006, www.cost.eu
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION Bitumen and bituminous binders – Framework for

specifying cationic bitumen emulsions. BS EN 13808. British Standards Institution, London.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT (2006*). Traffic signs manual, Chapter 8:

Traffic Safety Measures and Signs for Road Works and Temporary Situations. Her Majesty's
BS 434 Part 2:2006, Bitumen Road Emulsions, Part 2 Code of Practice for the use of cationic
bitumen emulsions on roads and other paved areas. British Standards Institution, London.
BS 594987:2010, Asphalt for roads and other paved areas. Specification for transport, laying,
compaction and type testing protocols. British Standards Institution, London.
January 2012 30
APPENDIX C
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL TESTING
ADHESION TEST PROCEDURE
The contractor shall test to the satisfaction of the Engineer that adequate adhesion exists
between the Geosynthetic and the underlying pavement.
1. This test may be carried out on the Geosynthetic after it is placed or it may be carried out
on a minimum one square metre sample cut in a square shape.
2. Place the Geosynthetic on the surface to be overlaid.
3. Apply adequate vertical pressure to fully activate the bond, e.g. by use of an installation
machine, roller or other means approved by the manufacturer/Installer.
4. Insert a hook of a spring balance (fish scale) under the centre of the Geosynthetic sample.
Pull the spring balance up until the sample just starts to pull loose and record the gauge
reading. In the event that 9kg or more of force is required to pull the sample up from the road
surface, sufficient adhesion has taken place and the paving operation may begin.
5.In the event that the sample does not have 9kg adherence, stop installation, identify if the
bond to activate the adhesion needs to be improved or if there is a cleanliness, or moisture
issue present. Resolve these issues prior to installing the remainder of the Geosynthetic and
prior to placing asphalt on top of the Geosynthetic.
6. Verify proper adhesion with this test once every 1,000 m2 or as directed by the Engineer.
Draft RSTA Code of Practice for Inhibiting Cracking in Bituminous Bound Layers Using
Geosynthetics and Steel Mesh
On-site adhesion validation
On-site adhesion validation
7-13 kg
8~15 cm
In accordance with the ADEPT guidance note at least two cores shall be taken per 500 sq.m
from the finished surface or after the first layer of asphalt has been overlaid as dictated by the
site programme. This rate may be reduced on the basis of consistent positive results. The
coring shall be done carefully and ensure at least 50mm of the existing road pavement is
included below the SAMI/ reinforcing layer. With overlay thickness greater than 160mm, this
test should not normally be needed. The cores shall be tested in a UKAS accredited
laboratory for shear bond using the torque bond test as described in the Guideline for Thin
Surfacing and Tensile Adhesion Test as described in TRL 176.
January 2012 31
Tests results shall be provided in a timely manner. The minimum values required depend
upon the thickness of asphalt overlay and are as follows (Based upon IAN 96Rev 1 Guidance
on implementing results of research on bridge deck waterproofing).
Surfacing thickness >120 mm[1] 120 – 90 mm[1] 90 – 60 mm < 60mm

Tensile adhesion test [2] 0.30MPa 0.50MPa 0.70MPa 0.8
MPa
Shear bond test[2] 0.30MPa 0.30MPa 0.40MPa 0.6
MPa
Note 1. Where work is soundly executed, the higher values of bond should be readily
achieved, and must be seen as beneficial regardless of the overlay thickness.
Note 2. Where significant braking or turning forces are expected or the SAMI used as part of
a structural layer over a soft substrate, the values for 90-60mm surfacing thickness should be
achieved.
Note 3. Mean of 3 cores.
Note 4. Well compacted asphalt layers and the bond between them will withstand these
forces without destruction if properly laid and fully compacted. Should failure occur in or
between the asphalt layers at values below these quoted, the asphalt installation is defective
and may need replacement. It may be prudent to take additional cores in a case of doubt to
enable the SAMI bond to be assessed.
Note 5. The installer may propose for consideration an alternative method of providing
evidence of adequate bond in the completed SAMI/reinforcing layer system.
Other test methods that may be considered are the Leutner test method and/or the following
Wedge Splitting test.
Leutner Test
The Leutner test method is a laboratory measurement of shear interface properties between
asphalt layers. Results are presented and compared for both laboratory prepared specimens
and field cores. The standard Leutner test was modified by the introduction of a 5 mm gap
into the shear plane to reduce edge damage caused by misalignment of the specimen and
specimens that incorporate a thin surfacing material were extended using a 30 mm thick
grooved metal cylinder to eliminate dependence of the shear strength on surfacing thickness.
The laboratory produced surfacing/binder course combinations incorporating the 20 mm
Dense Bitumen Macadam (20 DBM) binder course showed the highest average shear
strengths when nothing was applied at the interface and the lowest average shear strengths
when the tack coat was applied at the interface. The average shear strength from field cores
was found to increase as the class of the road increases for both surfacing/binder course
interfaces and binder course/base interfaces.
Wedge splitting method for fatigue testing
Initially developed for fracture tests the wedge splitting test after Tschegg is been developed
to measure fatigue crack growth in asphalt interfaces. The principle of this method is shown
in Figure 1. The method allows quick assessment of new and existing reinforced pavement
January 2012 32
and provides a simple quality assurance of the geosynthetics bond strength throughout life of
the pavement. The test can be used on circular cores or beams as well as the illustrated
cuboid. These cuboids were cut out of drilling cores, so that the interfaces between base- and
top-layers were in the middle of the specimen. A symmetrical groove on top of the sample
can either be prepared by cutting or which is more common by gluing stone cuboids onto the
top of the sample. To assure crack initiation at interface, a so called “starter notch” has to be
cut at the bottom of the groove. From here, the crack starts to grow along the interface down
to the ground of the sample driven by load. This method has been adopted by the Austrian
Highways Authority and is used in a number of European countries
Bestimmumng der Kerbzugfestighkeit und der spezifischen Bruchenergie von

Baustoffen, Baustoffverbindungen und Verbunwerkstoffen –
Keilspaltmethodse ONORM B 3592 2010-11-30 (Wedge splitting test method)
January 2012 33
APPENDIX D
REFERENCE PROJECTS
Project/Location Client Cracking Mechanism System Installed To Constructed

Road Construction Overcome Cracking
Mechanism
A45 Billing HA Expansion and Contraction 100kn/m Self adhesive May 2007
Reflection cracks over coated glassfibre grid
jointed concrete sprayed with Sealoflex
PMB binder
200kn/m coated
glassfribre geocomposite
installed on Sealoflex
PMB binder
Tulse Hill L.B. Reflection cracks over 100kn/m Self adhesive 2002
Lambeth Lambeth lean mix base suffering coated glassfibre grid
from settlement and
traffic loading
Sherrard St Leicester Reflective cracking 100kn/m coated Feb 2011
Melton Mowbray CC caused by differential glassfibre geocomposite
settlement in utility trenches installed on 160/220
Pen grade bitumen
Uttoxeter Rd Derby Traffic loading over thin 100kn/m Self adhesive July 2010
Derby City C construction causing coated glassfibre grid
fatigue cracking with proprietory tack
and crazing film eliminating the need
to spray bond coats
A143 Bungay Norfolk Surface appeared hard Paving Fabric 2003
Norfolk CC and brittle fatigue
cracking.
A243 Leatherhead TFL Unreinforced concrete slab 200kn/m glassfibre 2006
Surrey road base suffering from geocomposite
settlement caused by heavy
traffic loading and repairs
January 2012 34
Marine Parade Norfolk Cyclical high water tables 100kn/m glassfibre 2007
Gt Y armouth CC and heavy traffic loading geocomposite
leading to brittle and
reflective cracking.
Middlesex Street L.B. Concrete carriageway 100kn/m glassfibre 1995
Tower Hamlets Tower showing deteriorated geocomposite
Hamlets surfacing
A75 Blackcraig Dumfries Soft ground creating Steelmesh 1999
Dumfries and & Galloway severe settlement and
Galloway cracking
A4144 Abingdon Oxford Fatigue cracking caused Steelmesh 2003
Rd, Oxford CC by extremely low CBR
values
A507 Ampthill Bedford. Fatigue cracking caused Steelmesh July 2001
By Pass CC by traffic loading
B7052 Whauphill Dumfries & Settlement cracking over Steelmesh April 2003
Galloway peat sub grade due to heavy
trafficking
London Luton London Runway surfacing showing Bitumen coated 1988
Airport Luton Air. extensive reflective cracking Polyester geocomposite
Operators Ltd from the expansion and 50/50 kn/m
construction joints from
PQC
BAB Dresden Landesbetrieb Concrete carriageway to be Bitumen coated 1990
Berlin carriageway Strabenbau overlaid with asphalt Polyester geocomposite
Brandenberg 50/50 kn/m
NL
Ochtrup Municipality Alligator cracking due to Bitumen coated 1996
Rosenstrasse of Steinfurt traffic loading Polyester geocomposite
Germany 50/50 kn/m
Corso Giovanni Expansion and contraction Bitumen coated 2005

Agnelli, Torino cracking from concrete Polyester geocomposite
Italy slabs 50/50 kn/m
Polyproperline
Ballymount Ave South Dublin Carriageway widening geocomposite 2005
Upgrade Dublin CC installed with
Ireland 160/220 Pen grade
bitumen
January 2012 35
RAF Odiham Defense PQC Thermal stresses 100kn/m Glasfibre 2010

Hampshire Estates geocomposite installed
with 160/220 Pen
grade bitumen
A505 Cambridge Herts Concrete roadbase overlaid 100kn/m Glasfibre 1999

Rd /Meadowbank CC with asphalt, severely geocomposite installed
Roundabout, cracking by traffic loading with 160/220 Pen
Hitchin, Herts grade bitumen
Stephensons Leicester Reflective cracking caused 100kn/m Glasfibre 2011

Drive Leics C.C by instability of the geocomposite installed
concrete paving slabs due to
rainwater infiltration with 160/220 Pen
grade bitumen
Dundee Airport Dundee CC Reflective cracking from 100kn/m coated Glas

Runway underlying concrete slabs fibre geocomposite
installed with emulsion
Heathrow Airport BAA Flexible composite 50kn/m coated Glas 2004
Taxiway displaying reflective fibre geocomposite
118/119 cracking from underlying installed with emulsion
Joints
A167 Durham Trial performance of steel Steel Mesh April 1997
mesh manufactured by
TRC
A631 Shepcote Sheffield Dual carriageway upgrade Steel Mesh
Lane, Tinsley CC to cope with increased
traffic volume
Moss Roads Lancashire. Peat road suffering from Steel Mesh 1991
Lancashire CC high shrinkage, high
compressibility and low
shear strength
A9 Daviot Transverse cracking Steel Mesh 2001
Scotland and rutting in parts
January 2012 36
APPENDIX E
INSTALLATION PHOTOGRAPHS
Filling excessive voids after planing the surface
Purpose built Applicator for installing Geosynthetics
January 2012 37
Installing a Combination Grid onto Bond Coat
Installing a Glass Fibre Combination Grid
January 2012 38
Protective layer of chippings applied onto a PMB sprayed on a Geosynthetic
Installation of a Polypropylene Grid
January 2012 39
Combination Grid with Asphalt Overlay
Polypropylene Grid with Asphalt Overlay
January 2012 40
Steel Mesh Installation
APPENDIX F
RSTA Geosynthetics & Steel Meshes Committee
Howard J. Cooke - Asphalt Reinforcement Services Ltd – Chairman
David Shercliff - Tencate Geosynthetics (UK) Ltd
Richard Carr – ABG Ltd
Ian Fraser – Tensar International Ltd
Tom Foster – Foster Contracting Ltd
Richard Bennett – Maccaferri Ltd
John Greenhalgh – Bekaert Ltd
Graham Thomson – Huesker Ltd
Howard Robinson - RSTA
January 2012 41

RSTA Geosynthetics and Steel Meshes Co Jan 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RSTA Geosynthetics and Steel Meshes Co Jan 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RSTA Geosynthetics and Steel Meshes Co Jan 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RSTA Code of Practice for Geosynthetics and Steel Meshes

(for Inhibiting Cracking in Bituminous Bound Layers)

CODE OF PRACTICE FOR

Reference has been made to BS EN 15381:2008 Geotextiles and Geotextile Related

The information contained herein is intended to represent industry best practice. No

1 Introduction & overview 4

2 Geosynthetic & steel mesh materials 7

Appendix A - Glossary of terms

1. INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW

Cracking in asphalt pavements is now recognised as one of the biggest problems

A useful way of comparing the effectiveness of these systems is to express

Carriage Way treated with

The effectiveness and performance of the geosynthetic or steel mesh system is

To obtain the best performance it is necessary to consider a range of variables and

The main functions that have been identified are:

Key product types available are listed below:

2. GEOSYNTHETIC AND STEEL MESH MATERIALS

Polymer grids typically punched and stretched polypropylene or knitted/woven

Composites typically a combination of polymer or glass grids and non-woven

Non-woven fabrics typically needle punched polypropylene but polyester and

c) Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH)

3. SITE CONDITIONS AND ASSESSMENT

a) Existing Site Condition and History

As a general consideration associated with all pavement construction, water plays a

In order to make a fully informed evaluation of a reflective cracking problem there

Information on surface cracking should be recorded as follows*:

Other information required on the existing conditions and history includes:

 Traffic characteristics (number, type of vehicles, speed)

In addition to the information above a falling weight deflectometer could be

As indicated above it is important to have an understanding of the type of existing

Flexible Composite Pavements

Flexible composite pavements often display reflective cracking from construction

Pavement Quality Concrete/Cement Bound Materials/Lean Mix Road Base

Sett Paved Carriageways

Reflective cracking from expansion joints Cracking from utility trench

b) Determine Required Performance and Limitations

Furthermore, it is considered desirable that parameters which give an indication

c) Reflective Cracking Failure Modes

Reflective cracking generally results from one of three types of pavement

Unreinforced = 425,000 cycles = significant crack

Reinforced = 1,090,000 cycles = no open crack

Shear: This is generally accepted to be the most difficult mode of failure to

Thermal: This mode of cracking is not as prevalent in the UK as some other

However, by way of assistance in this regard, and in addition to the information

Glass fibre composite

Planed/ rough Roughness/ striations <

Roughness/ striations > Steel mesh

a. Selection of appropriate installation contractor

The performance of the geosynthetic or steel mesh is strongly influenced by the

Geosynthetic and steel mesh installers must be registered to National Highway

b. Planning the Execution of the Work

d. Bond Coat and Application

f. Steel mesh installation

SAMI Surface dressing installation methods

Traffic Management will be the responsibility of the Principal Contractor.

j. Health & Safety

RSTA members involved in manufacturing and installing geosynthetic and steel

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 To maintain and when required raise standards of product installation.

Carbon fibre grid