Comparing the Performance of Historical and Regular Stone Pavement Structures in Urban Trafficked Areas through the Finite Element Method (FEM)

Abstract

Stone pavement structures (SPS), also known as stone roads or stone-paved roads, are road pavements constructed using stones as the primary surface material. Different types of SPS exist; historically, irregular-shaped stones with downward protrusions have been often exploited since regular-shaped stones were difficult to be produced. More recently, regular cuboid stones can be also used. Accordingly, in new construction and renovations of SPS, pavement designers must take an essential decision concerning the adoption of historical or regular stones. Nonetheless, it is often confusing which of the two types of stones should be employed, considering that historical and regular SPS follow the same theory and pavement design methods. Therefore, a comparison between the performance of these two types of SPS is required to support their design and maintenance. Moreover, SPS are limitedly investigated and, to the best of our knowledge, there are no research contributions that address this specific task. Accordingly, in the present study, after conducting a laboratory characterization and in situ structural survey by Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) on a SPS, a comparative analysis based on the Finite Element Method (FEM) was carried out for investigating the structural performance of the historical (H-SPS) and regular SPS (R-SPS) in urban trafficked areas, where SPS must withstand heavy traffic loads. Specifically, considering both typologies of SPS, the paper aims to model and investigate: (a) the mechanical behavior under loading (displacements, stress, and strain distribution), (b) failure criteria (stone warpage and separation between the stones and the mortar joint), (c) the joint efficiency between stones, and (d) to which extent the road subgrade stiffness may influence the performance of SPS. In addition to the pavement design perspective, the research also provides a short glance at the strengths and weaknesses of R-SPS and H-SPS from other sides, such as functionality, ease of maintenance, construction techniques, and cultural and historical values.