Influence of SAMI on the Performance of Reinforcement Grids

  • Martin Arraigada
  • Christiane RaabEmail author
  • Manfred N. Partl
  • Federico Perrotta
  • Gabriele Tebaldi
Conference paper
Part of the RILEM Bookseries book series (RILEM, volume 13)


Over the last decades, reinforcement grids have been used to prolong the service life of pavements. Although there is a broad consensus about their overall efficiency, there are still many open questions about the best alternatives regarding the materials to use, the shapes of the grid, their installation method or their position in the pavement among others. One controversial aspect is the use of Stress Absorbing Membranes Interlayers (SAMI) together with the application of a grid. Many manufacturers claim that the SAMI helps sealing any preexisting cracks in the underlying layer, retarding their propagation to the surface. This paper reports about the performance of a reinforcement grid installed with SAMI in a pavement with artificial cracks. One of the parameters analyzed to evaluate the performance, is the propagation of artificial cracks from the base course to the pavement surface. Other important consideration is the rutting development. To that end, the same cracked pavement, reinforced with a fiber grid and SAMI and without any reinforcement is loaded with identical accelerated trafficking, carried out with the traffic simulator MLS10. Results show that, although the grid with SAMI is able to slow down the formation of cracks in the surface, the density of cracks at the end of the tests is as high as if no grid was used. Moreover, resulting rutting in the reinforced pavement is higher than in the pavement without grid, indicating that the use of SAMI has a counterproductive effect on the rutting performance of the reinforcement.


Reinforcement grid Interlayer (SAMI) Crack propagation Accelerated testing 


  1. Arraigada M, Pugliessi A, Partl MN, Martínez F (2014) Effect of full-size and down scale accelerated traffic loading on pavement behavior, Mater. Struct. 47, 1409-1424Google Scholar
  2. Jaecklin FP (1993) Geotextile use in asphalt overlays-design and installation techniques for successful applications, in Reflective Cracking in Pavements: State of the Art and Design Recommendation  ed. by L. Francken, E. Beuving, A.A.A. Molenaar s, 83-101Google Scholar
  3. Montestruque G, Bernucci L, Fritzen M, Goretti da Motta L (2012) Stress Relief Asphalt Layer and Reinforcing Polyester Grid as Anti-reflective Cracking Composite Interlayer System in Pavement Rehabilitation A. Scarpas et al. (Eds.), 7th RILEM International Conference on Cracking in Pavements, Volume 4, 1189–1197Google Scholar
  4. Pasquini E, Pasetto M, Canestrari F (2015) Geocomposites against reflective cracking in asphalt pavements: laboratory simulation of a field application: Road Materials and Pavement Design, DOI:  10.1080/14680629.2015.1044558
  5. Vanelstraete A and de Bondt H (1997) Crack prevention and use of overlay systems, in Prevention of Reflective Cracking in Pavements, RILEM Report 1 8Google Scholar
  6. Schweizerischer Verband der Strassen- und Verkehrsfachleute VSS (2013) Asphaltmischgut – Mischgutanforderungen– Teil 1: Asphalt-beton (Asphalt mixes – requirements – Part 1 Asphalt concrete) Swiss Standard N 640431-1 NA (in German)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Arraigada
    • 1
  • Christiane Raab
    • 1
    Email author
  • Manfred N. Partl
    • 1
  • Federico Perrotta
    • 2
  • Gabriele Tebaldi
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.EmpaDuebendorfSwitzerland
  2. 2.University of ParmaParmaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of ParmaParmaItaly
  4. 4.E.S.S.I.E., Department of Civil and Coastal EngineeringUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations