A majority of literature indicates that geosynthetic inclusion in flexible pavement bases, subjected to highway loading, improves performance by reducing rutting or vertical pressure on weak subgrade layers. Instances where geosynthetics were less successful in highway pavements included strong subgrade soils and/or thick pavement layers. Thus, understanding the improvement that can be expected from geosynthetic inclusion in airfield pavements, that are often more substantial than highway pavements, requires an evaluation of existing airfield pavement assets and design methodology. To achieve this objective, a number of tasks were performed: (1) review of in-service pavement thickness and subgrade strength to quantify military airfield pavement characteristics, (2) review of current Department of Defense (DOD) design methodologies to determine if geosynthetic inclusion can be adequately characterized in existing design procedures for new airfields, (3) evaluation to determine if (and in what conditions) an expected performance improvement is financially viable, and (4) implementation in military airfields in manners other than new construction. Results indicated that airfield pavements were generally thicker and stronger than highway pavements, and that in-service airfield pavements exceeded the pavement characteristics where geosynthetics have been identified to provide a meaningful performance improvement. A review of the existing DOD design methodology indicated that any improvement from geosynthetic inclusion in thicker pavements was hidden within the variability of the data used to formulate the existing design methodology. An initial cost evaluation suggested that design life extension (if any) could be the preferred means of quantifying geosynthetic improvement and that the reduction in aggregate thickness attributed to geosynthetic inclusion did not seem to provide an initial cost savings for military airfields. Geosynthetic inclusion in airfield damage repair or as a crack mitigation technique may be more beneficial than aggregate base reinforcement in new construction.

多数文献表明，在高速公路荷载作用下，柔性路面基层中的土工合成材料夹杂物通过减少弱路基上的车辙或垂直压力来提高性能。土工合成材料在高速公路人行道上不太成功的例子包括坚固的路基土壤和/或厚实的人行道层。因此，要了解可以从飞机路面中土工合成材料中获得的改善（通常比高速公路路面更为重要），就需要对现有的飞机场路面资产和设计方法进行评估。为了实现这一目标，我们执行了许多任务：（1）审查在役路面的厚度和路基强度，以量化军用飞机场的路面特性，（2）审查当前的国防部（DOD）设计方法，以确定在新机场的现有设计程序中土工合成材料包容性是否能够得到充分表征，（3）评估以确定预期的性能改进是否（在什么条件下）在财务上是可行的可行；以及（4）在军事机场以不同于新建的方式实施。结果表明，飞机场路面通常比公路路面更厚和更坚固，并且服务中的飞机场路面超出了已被土工合成材料识别为可提供有意义的性能改善的路面特征。对现有DOD设计方法的回顾表明，较厚路面中土工合成材料的任何改进都隐藏在用于制定现有设计方法的数据的可变性中。初步的成本评估表明，延长设计寿命（如果有的话）可能是量化土工合成材料改进的首选方法，并且由于土工合成材料的加入而导致的总厚度的减少似乎并未为军用飞机场节省最初的成本。在新建筑中，土工合成材料包含在飞机场损伤修复中或作为裂缝缓解技术可能比集材基础加固更有利。初步的成本评估表明，设计寿命的延长（如果有的话）可能是量化土工合成材料改进的首选方法，并且由于土工合成材料的加入而导致的总厚度的减少似乎并未为军用飞机场节省初始成本。在新建筑中，土工合成材料包含在飞机场损伤修复中或作为裂缝缓解技术可能比集材基础加固更有利。初步的成本评估表明，延长设计寿命（如果有的话）可能是量化土工合成材料改进的首选方法，并且由于土工合成材料的加入而导致的总厚度的减少似乎并未为军用飞机场节省最初的成本。在新建筑中，土工合成材料包含在飞机场损伤修复中或作为裂缝缓解技术可能比集材基础加固更有利。