An analytical model for evaluation of compaction-induced stresses in a reinforced soil mass

Suppression of Soil Dilation—A Reinforcing Mechanism of Soil-Geosynthetic Composites

“…Past experience with finite element analysis conducted by other researchers (e.g., [13,21]) has indicated that the effect of residual (lock-in) lateral stress due to fill compaction needs to be accounted for in the analysis of reinforced soil structures. Wu and Pham [29] reasoned that this might be due to the fact that frictional resistance along soil-geosynthetic interface tends to restrain lateral deformation of the soil hence resulting in a significantly higher residual stress due to fill compaction. The residual lateral stress in a GRS mass due to compaction, Δσ 3 , in this study was evaluated by the following equation [29]:…”

“…Wu and Pham [29] reasoned that this might be due to the fact that frictional resistance along soil-geosynthetic interface tends to restrain lateral deformation of the soil hence resulting in a significantly higher residual stress due to fill compaction. The residual lateral stress in a GRS mass due to compaction, Δσ 3 , in this study was evaluated by the following equation [29]:…”

“…The explanations of how to obtain the model parameters in Eq. (1) have been given by Pham [22] and Wu and Pham [29]. The finite element analysis was carried out by following closely the construction procedure for specimen preparation of the SGC tests.…”

Impacts of Compaction Load and Procedure on Stress-Deformation Behaviors of a Soil Geosynthetic Composite (SGC) Mass—A Case Study

“…The CIS in a soil mass has been the subject of study by many authors. For instance, Reference [7] presented a theory to calculate compaction-induced residual lateral earth pressures of a frictionless, rigid, vertical and non-yielding wall; Reference [8] analytically examined the effects of compaction at various levels of fill behind a retaining wall; Reference [9] used a K 0 -based nonlinear and a K 0 -based bi-linear models to simulate compaction operation of GRS mass and obtained good agreement between the simulated CIS results and the measured data of unreinforced earth retaining walls; subsequently, References [10,11] suggested that CIS could be calculated using either the simplified bi-linear model, or the nonlinear model but with the aid of finite element analysis; based on the studies of References [9,10], References [12,13] used a simplified stress path that was developed based on-(i) the model introduced by Reference [9], (ii) the companion hand-calculation procedure for an unreinforced soil mass by Reference [10], and (iii) the concept of average stress of SGC behavior proposed by Reference [14], to demonstrate that the CIS at any given location, as a result of multiple passes of a compactor moving towards or moving away from that location, could be estimated by applying the compaction load directly at the location under review.…”

“…If aided by experimental and field measured data, the numerical methods have many advantages such as obtaining more comprehensive results, and investigating the effects of various parameters, which are difficult or costly to achieve in the laboratory and field tests. Two-dimensional (2D) numerical studies have been conducted by References [6,12,22,23] to evaluate the composite behavior of the GRS wall constructed by Reference [6] under static loading condition. In particular, Reference [6] conducted a series of finite element analyses to examine the effect of specimen dimensions on the resulting global stress-strain and volume change relationships of SGC mass with the aim to determine the proper dimensions of a generic SGC that will produce load-deformation behavior sufficiently close to that of a large SGC mass.…”