Search

The problem of a reinforced fill over a void has been the subject of much research in the geosynthetics literature. Previous studies have mainly focused on finding closed-form solutions to predict the tensile loads and strains in the reinforcement layer once a void develops below the fill. In this paper, a 2D finite difference (FLAC) model that implements the hyperbolic isochronous load-strain model for the reinforcement by Bathurst and Naftchali (2021) is used to investigate the influence of the rate-dependent properties of polymeric geosynthetic reinforcement materials on reinforcement tensile strains and load, and overall system performance including vertical deformation at the reinforcement elevation and at the fill surface. The paper also investigates the influence of fill soil properties and constitutive model type, foundation condition, void geometry and fill height on system performance. The results of numerical modelling are compared to predictions made using the closed-form solution of Giroud et al. (1990) and in the BSI 8006-1 (2010) design code. The results of numerical modelling demonstrate that the choice of fill height to void width and the stiffness of the rate-dependent geosynthetic reinforcement layer are important to ensure that the maximum reinforcement strain, allowable strength and fill surface settlement criteria are not exceeded. • A numerical 2D FLAC model is used to perform a parametric analysis of the reinforced fill over a void problem. • The numerical approach is validated against a full-scale test reported in the literature. • A simple rate-dependent hyperbolic isochronous load-strain (creep) model is used for the geosynthetic reinforcement. • The ratio of fill height to void width and the reinforcement stiffness are shown to strongly influence numerical outcomes. • The results of numerical modelling are compared to predictions made using two well-known closed-form solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the quantitative influence of uncertainty in the estimate of geosynthetic reinforcement stiffness on numerical outcomes using analytical solutions for a) the maximum outward facing deformation in mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls, b) maximum reinforcement tensile loads and strain in MSE walls under operational conditions, and c) the mobilized reinforcement stiffness in a geosynthetic layer used to reinforce a fill over a void. The stiffness of the reinforcement is modelled using an isochronous two-parameter hyperbolic load-strain model. A linear relationship between isochronous stiffness and the ultimate tensile strength of the reinforcement is used to estimate reinforcement stiffness when product-specific creep data are not available at time of design. Solution outcomes are presented deterministically and probabilistically. The quantitative link between nominal factor of safety used in deterministic working stress design practice and reliability index is provided. The latter is preferred in modern performance-based design to quantify margins of safety within a probabilistic framework. Finally, the paper highlights the practical benefit of using product-specific isochronous secant stiffness data when available, rather than estimates of isochronous stiffness values based on reinforcement type or pooled data. • Uncertainty in the estimate of geosynthetic stiffness is investigated for three geosynthetic-reinforced soil applications. • The stiffness of the reinforcement is modelled using an isochronous two-parameter hyperbolic load-strain model. • Isochronous secant stiffness estimated using: a) product-specific creep data; b) type of reinforcement; and c) pooled data. • Closed-form solutions linking the nominal factor of safety to the reliability index for each application are provided. • Solution outcomes are presented deterministically and probabilistically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, upper bound limit analysis that includes a horizontal pseudostatic seismic force is used for the first time to obtain the limit load on strip footings seated on cohesive-frictional soils reinforced with a single geosynthetic layer. Reinforcement tensile rupture and sliding failure modes for the geosynthetic layer are included in the analyses. Results of analyses are presented as optimum reinforcement depths and a bearing capacity equation with a single term and different bearing capacity factors for tensile rupture and sliding failure modes. The bearing capacity factors are presented in tables and capture the combined influence of the reinforcement strength, soil frictional strength and cohesion, soil unit weight, footing geometry, uniform surcharge, and magnitude of horizontal ground acceleration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

6.Databaseofloaddata Miyata and Bathurst (2019) developed a database of 113 measured steel grid loads (T max) from 11 instrumented steel grid walls constructed with cohesive-frictional soils and purely frictional soils. Reliability-based design and analysis for internal limit states of steel grid-reinforced mechanically stabilized earth walls. Thegeneralapproachdescribedin thispaperisanimportantcontributiontonext-generationanalysis and design using modern concepts of RBD for internal stability design of both steel and polymeric soil-reinforced MSE walls and is thus in alignment with the international movement towards RBD for geotechnical structures (e.g., Low and Phoon 2015;Phoon2017;PhoonandChing2015;ISSMGE2017). Allen et al. (2001, 2004) quantified the level of accuracy of the Simplified Method for steel MSE walls using bias statistics deduced from a large number of instrumented walls. 1.Introduction This paper is focused on reliability-based design (RBD) and analysis for tensile strength and pullout limit states of steel grid-reinforced mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls constructed with frictional soils and subjected to typical operational conditions. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Canadian Geotechnical Journal is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The focus of this paper is on quantitative evaluation of four different methods that use closed-form equations to calculate the nominal load in steel grid-reinforced soil walls under operational (end of construction) conditions. The four methods are the Coherent Gravity Method used in the UK, the AASHTO Simplified Method (USA), the PWRC Method used in Japan and the Simplified Stiffness Method. The accuracy of the methods is quantified based on analysis of bias statistics where bias is the ratio of measured to predicted (nominal) load. A large database of 113 measured reinforcement loads collected from 11 instrumented field walls is used in the study. For walls constructed with frictional soils, the Coherent Gravity Method and PWRC Method were the least accurate. The AASHTO Simplified Method demonstrated better accuracy and the Simplified Stiffness Method was the most accurate of all methods examined. The Coherent Gravity Method and the updated Simplified Stiffness Method for steel grid walls in the current study have the advantage that they can be used with soils that have a dependable soil cohesive strength component. However, the accuracy of the Simplified Stiffness Method was much better for all soil types based on bias analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper reports the details of numerical models used to predict the performance of two 3.6 m-high well-instrumented wrapped-face walls. The walls were nominally identical except that the reinforcement material in one wall was a steel welded wire mesh and in the other a biaxial polypropylene geogrid. The backfill soil was modelled using both linear and nonlinear elastic-plastic constitutive models. A general hyperbolic (nonlinear) axial load-strain-time model was used for the reinforcement. The numerical results show good agreement with measured performance features for the welded wire mesh wrapped-face wall. Agreement between numerical predictions of facing displacements and maximum reinforcement loads was less accurate for the very flexible geogrid wrapped-face wall. The discrepancies are believed to be related to the unusually flexible wrapped face used in the geogrid wall construction. Numerically predicted and measured maximum reinforcement loads are compared to loads using the AASHTO reinforcement strength-based design approach (Simplified Method) and the Simplified Stiffness Method which is an empirical reinforcement stiffness-based method. The paper provides physical test data that can be used to benchmark other numerical models, highlights lessons learned during the development of the models, and identifies reasonable expectations for numerical model accuracy for models of similar complexity used to simulate the performance of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall structures under operational conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerical modelers are often faced with the challenge to numerically reproduce the physical behavior of soil-geosynthetic interaction problems using assumed values for missing soil and interface model parameters. This paper examines two such examples using the finite-difference method, (1) horizontal pullout of a geosynthetic (geogrid) reinforcement layer in a pullout box and (2) a geosynthetic (geotextile)-reinforced soil layer over a void. It also presents the results of parametric sensitivity analyses for the missing soil and interface model parameter values and identifies the values that give the best agreement with measured data. The paper further demonstrates that correct modeling of geometrical nonlinearity is key to accurately predicting the performance of geosynthetic-reinforced soil systems controlled by the tensioned membrane effect. The lessons learned in this study will be of interest to numerical modelers during numerical model design of geosynthetic-reinforced soil systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Soil-cement deep mixing (DM) columns combined with geosynthetic basal reinforcement are an accepted technique in geotechnical engineering to construct road and railway embankments over soft foundations. Both full-width and unit cell models have been used to numerically simulate the performance of geosynthetic-reinforced and column-supported (GRCS) embankments. However, the typical unit cell model with horizontally fixed side boundaries cannot simulate the lateral spreading of the embankment fill and foundation soil. As a result, the calculated reinforcement tensile loads using typical unit cell models are much less than those from matching full-width models. The paper first examines GRCS embankments using a full-width model with small- and large-strain modes in FLAC and then compares the calculated results from the full-width model with those using a typical unit cell model, a recently proposed modified unit cell model, and a closed-form solution. The paper also examines the influence of the soft foundation soil modulus, reinforcement tensile stiffness, and DM column modulus on the reinforcement tensile loads. Numerical analyses show that the reinforcement tensile loads from the modified unit cell model are in good agreement with those from the full-width model for zones under the embankment crest for all cases and conditions examined in the paper. Both the full-width model and modified unit cell model perform better than the typical unit cell model for the prediction of the reinforcement tensile load when compared to the closed-form solution. However, while the modified unit cell developed by the writers is shown to be more accurate than the typical unit cell when predictions are compared to results using full-width numerical simulations, the benefit of using this approach to reduce computation times may be limited in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Geotechnical Journal is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Probabilistic slope stability analyses of simple geosynthetic reinforced soil slopes were carried out using the shear strength reduction method in combination with the finite element method (FEM). An existing open-source FEM code was modified to include bar elements to model horizontal layers of geosynthetic reinforcement. Analysis results using the modified code (mFEM) demonstrate that large reductions in probability of failure can be realized by adding geosynthetic reinforcement layers to constructed slopes. The modified code was also used to investigate the effect of variability of soil friction angle on probabilistic outcomes for constructed unreinforced and reinforced purely frictional soil slopes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Geosynthetic-reinforced and column-supported (GRCS) embankments have proven to be an effective construction technique for fills on soft foundations. The paper introduces a modified unit cell approach to model GRCS embankments supported by deep mixed column walls. The modified unit cells include linear elastic springs at one or both vertical boundaries to simulate lateral displacements of the embankment fill and foundation soil. The finite difference program FLAC is used to compare numerical outcomes using the modified unit cells with those using the typical unit cell arrangement with lateral rigid side boundaries. Numerical results demonstrate good agreement between simulations using small-strain and large-strain modes in some cases and large differences in other cases. Lateral displacements of the embankment fill and foundation soil using the modified unit cells are shown to have large influence on reinforcement loads. Finally the paper demonstrates that calculated reinforcement loads are sensitive to choice of small-strain or large-strain mode when using program FLAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper reports numerical model details and predictions of the end-of-construction performance for two instrumented and well-documented mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls. The walls were constructed as part of the highway SR-18 approach fills for a bridge near Seattle, Washington. The geogrid reinforced block face walls were modeled using a commercially available two-dimensional (2D) finite-difference program. The paper provides details on how material properties were selected from laboratory testing of wall components and how the computer modeling was carried out. The paper shows that predicted wall deformations and reinforcement strains were in reasonable agreement with measured data using both linear elastic-plastic and nonlinear elastic-plastic constitutive models for the soil. The geogrid reinforcement was simulated using a nonlinear load-strain-time secant stiffness model and cable elements. The paper compares numerical predictions of reinforcement loads at end of construction with measured values and predictions using a AASHTO Simplified Method, K-stiffness Method, and Simplified Stiffness Method. The paper is a useful benchmark for modelers because it demonstrates what the authors believe are reasonable expectations of model accuracy for Class C predictions of deformations and reinforcement strains for these types of walls when high-quality project information is available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

This paper describes a strategy to compute deterministic and probabilistic estimates of maximum outward deformation of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) modular block wall structures of particular type, materials and boundary conditions. The reference walls in this study were a group of MSE modular block walls constructed under carefully controlled laboratory conditions. A numerical FLAC model was first demonstrated to give reasonable estimates of measured maximum wall deformations. The model was then used to carry out a sensitivity analysis using a modest number of simulations with different values of key input parameters. Six key control parameters were selected based on the results of the sensitivity analysis and a review of the literature on wall performance. A response surface of full quadratic form was used to predict maximum normalized wall deformations as a function of the six key parameters. The results of a second set of 729 numerical simulations corresponding to the maximum number of possible permutations of three different values for each of the six control parameters were used to find the coefficient terms for the response surface equation using a conventional least squares method. The response surface method (RSM) equation was then used to carry out a large number of Monte Carlo simulations using random sampling of distributions for soil friction angle, surcharge pressure, block–block interface shear stiffness and reinforcement stiffness input parameters. The resulting statistics were used to construct a cumulative distribution function (CDF) for maximum normalized wall deformations. The CDF is then used to link reliability performance-based design to a reasonable range of serviceability criteria for wall deformations generated under operational conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]