Search

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]

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]