Search

The Simplified Method as reported in AASHTO and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) manuals has been demonstrated to give poor predictions of unfactored reinforcement loads and strains, especially for geosynthetic reinforced soil walls. The writers have proposed the K-stiffness Method to improve the load prediction accuracy for walls under working stress (operational) conditions. However, it has also been recognized in recent publications by the writers and others that further improvements to the K-stiffness Method are needed. Furthermore, acceptance of the K-stiffness Method has been hindered due to its perceived complexity and the use of the plane strain friction angle to quantify the strength of the reinforced soil. This paper takes a fresh look at both methods and uses lessons learned from the K-stiffness Method development to improve the accuracy of the AASHTO/FHWA Simplified Method. Key parameters introduced during the development of the K-stiffness Method are applied to the Simplified Method and updated to further improve load prediction accuracy. Additional wall case histories have been added to the database used for the original K-stiffness Method to calibrate the new model and to broaden its utility. An important improvement is a single model that allows for seamless load prediction across a range of walls constructed with relatively extensible geosynthetic reinforcement and inextensible steel reinforcement materials. The quantitative improvement of the new model (Simplified Stiffness Method) compared to the current AASHTO/FHWA Simplified Method is demonstrated through statistical analysis of load bias values (i.e., the ratio of measured to predicted reinforcement load). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An 11 m high dry-stacked masonry concrete block wall reinforced with a high-density polyethylene (HDPE) geogrid was designed, instrumented, and monitored for a period of 2 years as part of a highway-widening project southeast of Seattle, Washington, in the USA. An extensive materials-testing program was conducted to characterize the geogrid and backfill soil properties. The empirical-based K-stiffness method was used to design the wall, and this approach resulted in a 35% reduction in total required reinforcement strength compared with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials / Federal Highway Administration (AASHTO/FHWA) simplified method. The cost savings more than compensated for the cost of the instrumentation program. Geogrid strains were measured using strain gauges and extensometers, and the walls were surveyed to monitor facing deformations. The stiffness of the geogrid materials was computed from the results of laboratory in-isolation constant-load (creep) tests. The time- and strain-dependent stiffness values, in combination with measured strains, were used to compute measured reinforcement loads at the reinforcement connections and at locations within the reinforced soil backfill. The measured loads were compared with class A, B, and C1 predictions using the AASHTO/FHWA simplified and K-stiffness methods. These comparisons demonstrate that the simplified method significantly overestimated reinforcement loads, whereas the K-stiffness method provided estimates that were judged to be in better agreement with the measured results. The paper also quantifies the influence of construction procedures on reinforcement strains and load, shows that long-term creep of the reinforcement after 2 years after construction is negligible, and identifies lessons learned. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]