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]

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.)

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 the paper is on the influence of reinforcement design parameters (i.e. stiffness, length and vertical spacing) on the simulated earthquake response of reinforced soil retaining walls using reduced-scale model shaking table tests. A series of instrumented 1/6-scale model walls was constructed and dynamically loaded using a stepped-amplitude harmonic base acceleration record. The reinforcement design parameters investigated were found to have a significant effect on model response. Experimental results showed that the magnitude of accumulated facing lateral displacement under base excitation decreased with increasing reinforcement length, greater number of reinforcement layers and larger reinforcement stiffness. Significant down-drag forces at the back of the rigid facing were measured for all model configurations. However, the measured vertical load at the footing was not significantly influenced by changes in reinforcement parameters. The horizontal restrained (hinged) toe at the bottom of the rigid facing was shown to attract 30–60% of the total horizontal earth force depending on the reinforcement configuration. The magnitude and distribution of reinforcement connection loads was significantly affected by the reinforcement length, vertical spacing and stiffness. Measured footing loads, reinforcement connection loads and amplification factors are compared to values calculated using current practice in North America for geosynthetic reinforced soil walls and discrepancies between experimental results and design methods are identified. Implications of the physical test results to level of conservatism in current design practice are noted. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The paper describes a new working stress design methodology introduced by the writers for geosynthetic reinforced soil walls (K-Stiffness Method) that is now extended to steel reinforced soil walls. A large database of full-scale steel reinforced soil walls (a total of 20 fully instrumented wall sections) was used to develop the new design methodology. The effects of global wall stiffness, soil strength, reinforcement layer spacing, and wall height were investigated. Results of simple statistical analyses using the ratio of measured to predicted peak reinforcement loads (i.e., method bias) demonstrate the improved prediction accuracy. The AASHTO Simplified Method results in an average method bias of 1.1 with a coefficient of variation (COV) of 45%, whereas the proposed K-Stiffness Method results in an average bias of 0.95 and a COV of 32%. Soil strength was found to have limited influence on reinforcement loads for steel reinforced soil walls, especially for high shear strength soils, while global wall stiffness and wall height had a major influence on reinforcement loads. [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.)

Abstract: The paper describes the novel use of recycled construction and demolition waste (RCDW) material as the backfill material in an otherwise conventional 3.6-m high wrapped-face geosynthetic reinforced soil wall. The wall was constructed over a collapsible foundation soil which is common in the area around the capital city of Brasilia. The wall was instrumented and then monitored though dry and wet rainy seasons. The influence of cumulative rainfall on foundation compressibility was detectable and seasonal wetting and drying was shown to quantitatively influence wall deformations, settlement, horizontal earth pressures and reinforcement strains. Nevertheless, wall performance was judged to be satisfactory when compared to the performance of other walls of similar size constructed with traditional select granular soils over non-collapsible foundation soils. The results of this investigation demonstrate that significant project cost savings may be possible by avoiding more expensive traditional backfill materials and larger societal economic savings accrued by diverting RCDW waste streams from landfills. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]