Abstract
Construction and shrinkage control joints. The slabs are generally 4 m to 6 m in size and are approximately square. Although this approach to rigid airport pavement design is well established, some airports have used continuously reinforced concrete as an alternate approach. Based on a case study at a new major airport in Australia, this research theoretically compared a traditional plain jointed rigid aiport pavement to a structurally equivalent continuously reinforced concrete pavement. The two designs were compared on a whole of life cycle basis, including embodied carbonm determined based on the quantities of the different materials and published greenhouse gas emission rates associated with the different materials. The results show that the structurally equivalent continuosouly reinforced airport pavements are significant thinner and require significantly less joints than structurally equivalent plain jointed rigid airport pavements. The reduced concrete thickness was offset against the need for steel reinforcement, but still resulted in a net construction cost reduction associated with the continuously reinforced solution. The reduction in the quantity of joints in the continuosouly reinforced pavement solution flowed through the whole of life cost estimates and provided an overall whole of life benefit. The conclusions assist airports in deciding whether continuously reinforced rigid airport pavements are a viable alternate to traditional plain joints slabs in the future.