Comparative Analysis of Conventional Pavement Reinforcement vs. Geotextile Reinforcement: Material Properties, Construction Techniques, Performance Outcomes, and Cost Efficiency

Key Comparison Parameters:

1. Material Characteristics

• Traditional: Cement-stabilized aggregates (CBR >80%) & asphalt mixes (PG 64-22)

• Geotextile: Polypropylene/polyester fabrics (ASTM D4632/D4751 compliant)

2. Construction Protocols

• Traditional: 12-step process requiring batch plants, pavers, and 28-day curing

• Geotextile: 3-stage installation (subgrade prep → roll deployment → overlay)

3. Structural Performance

• Traditional: 20-30% faster crack propagation under 10^6 ESALs

• Geotextile: 40% stress reduction at base-subgrade interface

4. Lifecycle Economics

• Traditional: $35-50/m² initial cost + 15% 5-year maintenance

• Geotextile: $22-40/m² with 30% reduced maintenance frequency

Engineering Value Proposition:
This study quantifies how geotextile reinforcement:

• Extends service life by 5-8 years in freeze-thaw zones

• Reduces CO₂ emissions by 18% through material optimization

• Lowers whole-life costs by 25-35% versus conventional methods

(Note: Title structured for transportation agencies and civil engineers, featuring ASTM standards and measurable performance differentials for decision-making.)

Alternative Title Options:

1. "Geosynthetics in Pavement Engineering: A Cost-Benefit Assessment of Geotextile Reinforcement Systems"

2. "Performance Benchmarking of Traditional vs. Geotextile-Reinforced Roadways: Materials, Methods, and Maintenance Impacts"

3. "Sustainable Pavement Solutions: Technical and Economic Comparison Between Conventional and Geotextile Reinforcement Approaches"

Would you like to emphasize particular aspects (e.g., environmental benefits, specific geotextile types)? I can refine further based on priority focus areas.