Search

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]

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.)

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]

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.)